Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 818 | How LGBTQ Became Our State Religion | Guest: Auron MacIntyre

Episode Date: June 7, 2023

Today we're joined by Auron MacIntyre, BlazeTV host of "The Auron MacIntyre Show," to discuss why the Right isn't winning and the "Total State" takeover of the religion of LGBTQ. We discuss the rainbow brigade's insistence on exposing children to sexuality early on and how this is the key to predation. If you aren't able to stand up against the active destruction of children, you can't stand up against anything — but is the Right really up for this fight? We talk about how most people on the Right are terrified of being labeled anti-gay and the classic "LGB without the T" argument. We argue that you either have a cohesive moral vision or you don't, and if you don't, you'll be picked apart by those who do. We also discuss Ted Cruz tweeting out against Uganda's new anti-homosexuality law (of all humanitarian issues to speak up about) and how he bought into the rainbow narrative. We also discuss what the "Total State" is and whether there's any good news that can come of any of this. --- Timecodes: (01:35) Predators & indoctrinating children (09:27) Pride events and the push to involve children (12:11) "LGB without the T" / Right vs. Left (24:27) Ted Cruz Uganda tweet (32:20) "Phobic" words and the Left's dialectic tactics (38:10) Radical Left vs. radical Right (45:40) DeSantis (48:53) Total State & examples (54:49) Why is LGBTQ the state religion? (57:55) There's no such thing as neutrality (01:01:32) Can things turn around? / Long-term hope (01:07:45) Grassroots activism of the Right --- Today's Sponsors: A'Del — go to adelnaturalcosmetics.com and enter promo code "ALLIE" for 25% off your first order! EdenPURE — when you buy one Thunderstorm you get one FREE, this week only! Go to EdenPureDeals.com, use promo code 'ALLIE'! Bambee — You run your business. Let Bambee run your HR. Go to bambee.com and type in "RELATABLE" at checkout. Seven Weeks Coffee — Seven Weeks is a pro-life coffee company with a simple mission: DONATE 10% of every sale to pregnancy care centers across America. Get your organically farmed and pesticide-free coffee at sevenweekscoffee.com and let your coffee serve a greater purpose. Use the promo code 'ALLIE' to save 10% off your order. --- Links: Auron MacIntyre Substack: "Introduction To The Total State" https://auronmacintyre.substack.com/p/introduction-to-the-total-state Fox News: "Biden, Cruz condemn Uganda law allowing death penalty for 'aggravated homosexuality'" https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-cruz-condemn-uganda-law-allowing-death-penalty-aggravated-homosexuality --- Relevant Episodes: Ep 722 | The Death of Democracy & the Birth of Twitter 2.0 | Guest: Auron MacIntyre https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-722-the-death-of-democracy-the-birth-of-twitter/id1359249098?i=1000589941286 --- 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. America has a new state religion. It is the state religion of LGBTQ plus every public and private institution just about in the United States has been captured by this religion and the movement of the sexual revolution. is not stopping. It is breaking down every barrier that was once up to protect people from total and complete anarchy and moral chaos. How did this happen? Why is it happening? Can this advancement be stopped at all? And to people on the right even understand the moment that we're in? The answer to that is probably no. But we do have some solutions to this major problem from

Our friend and my Blaze TV colleague, Aaron McIntyre, he is the host of the Aaron McIntyre show on Blaze TV. We are going to be talking about all the problems with Republican politicians and right-wing movements and how we can rectify these things and actually harness power in a healthy and productive way to push good policy and good culture in the United States. This episode is brought to you by our friends at Good Ranchers. Go to Good Ranchers.com. Use code Alley at checkout. That's good ranchers.com code Alley.

Oran, thanks so much for coming back on Relatable. I appreciate it. Absolutely. Thanks for having me. Okay. So I love to get your thoughts on everything. And I'm glad that we kind of had a warm up conversation before we even started. I'm just, I really am fascinated by all of your takes on everything that happens in our culture.

So I want to get your thoughts on this yesterday. And I'm going to talk about this more tomorrow. I'll dedicate at least a segment of my show to this, but I had a Rolling Stones reporter reach out to me. Her name is E.J. Dixon. And she said that she's going to include me and some other people in this article about transphobia. And she said wrongly that I've only started talking about transgenderism in the past year and I'm doing it because it's, you know, growing my audience or whatever. I never looked into this person, but I started to research some of her articles and I found some really disturbing things. There's a theme. She defends the Netflix show

cuties where you've got 11-year-olds twerking. She basically links concerns about pedophilia and child sex trafficking with Q&on and conspiracy theories. And then I saw that she has an article from 2014 and it's titled, could child sex robots, quote unquote, cure pedophilia? So-called child sex robots don't exist yet, but here's why they're worth exploring further. She calls pedophilia a sexual orientation. She also says, I've become convinced that we need to stop getting caught up in our knee-jerk reactions to adults having sex with children. So I almost tagged you in this thread that I posted yesterday because I wanted to get your insight. Why do we see this so much from left-wing journalists, this kind of defense of pedophilia while at the same time trying to label

people like me who think that men can't become women extremists. Well, we've seen this pattern over and over again, right? This is how the ratchet turns. It was the same thing with gay marriage. Oh, you know, how does this affect your relationship? Can't possibly be a big issue for you. Why do you care so much about it? Now it's mandatory pride celebrations in all of your schools, all of your corporations. Are you speaking out against this? Well, you can't get a job anywhere. You might not be able to bank at your local bank. You know, this is the same thing. You know, they pretend it's not happening. It's not going on. You're crazy. Why would you point this out?

by the time they've implemented all this stuff, the answer is, oh, how could you possibly be against this? This is a popular consensus. Of course, it's always been like this. And this is kind of how we understand these sexual mores are connected. These boundaries that we have in society are all interconnected. The slippery slope is real. There's a reason that the religious right of the 80s and 90s warned us about all of this stuff and all of it became true. And they were mocked for doing it the entire time. And then it all just happened. And everyone said, well, of course, this was always the plan. You know, now there are more than happy to talk about how this was always the way things were going to go. But at the time,

everyone was called crazy and reactionary and ridiculous for calling these things out. Why are you obsessed with this? You must be someone like this, right? Those are all the accusations that get leveled. And I think it's because the obsession is to break down all these barriers. And when you move these things kind of out of the realm of the sacred, we say morality is not about evil. Morality is not about good versus bad. Morality is not about spiritual or of higher authority. it's all about medicine. Everybody is sick. Everybody has a condition.

It's all therapeutic. And so therapeutic answers are always the way that we solve things. And so when you're looking in that direction, well, why not let a pedophile have some kind of robot? How does it hurt you? How does it hurt your family? They're getting the therapy they need

to deal with their issue. And surely won't go any further, just like all these other things that went further, but we totally pretend didn't. Yeah. And there's also a very simplistic answer that you post about a lot. And what is that?

It's that it's not rocket science. They're evil and they want to dittle kids. Yeah, there's unfortunately, and again, it's not everyone. The vast majority of people support this stuff. They think they're behind the next civil rights movement. They think that they're on the right side of history, that they're pushing for this. Most people who are involved in this behavior are not explicitly interested in predation of children. But by removing those barriers, those essential moral, societal barriers between children and sexuality,

They are grooming children for predation. Anyone who is interested in taking action like this, anyone who's trying to, like, traffic children sexually at a young age, they know the first thing they do is expose children's sexuality too young. And if you're doing that as part of your civil rights movement, as part of your project to make everything acceptable and everything okay, then that means you have to expose children to sexuality, which is why we're talking to children about, you know, gender swapping at three or five years old, while we have elementary school teachers who think it's okay to teach children about masturbation

and things when they're in first grade. And what is that doing? Whether these teachers are specifically going out of their way to prepare children for that or not, they will eventually make children more likely to be accepting of this behavior. Yeah. And that's incredibly dangerous. Yeah. Megan Kelly recently played some audio on her podcast because she's doing a deep dive into the subway guy who ended up being a pedophile.

And she played some audio of a conversation between him and this woman who ended up being an undercover agent but was pretending to go along with, you know, the thing, his plans to basically abuse these young girls. And one of the things that he told her to do when you have these interactions with these young girls at school, make sure you bring up conversations about sex. Oh, if they start, you know, having, if they start talking about the opposite sex or these sexual things or these kind of verbodant things, then encourage that. And that is what you read from psychologists, from everyone who is an expert in child sex abuse, pedophilia, this kind of predation. The first thing that's done is to condition that child to start thinking about sex and to talk about sex. But they like what they play this game on the left that they say, well, talking about gender switching, talking about

masturbation, like you said, these very graphic pictures that we see available in these books that are in elementary school libraries. That has nothing to do with real sex. That has nothing to do with anything explicit. We're just trying to keep them safe. We're just trying to let them accept who they are. And then they do what you said. You're so gross that you would even think that this is anything inappropriate. So what do you what do you make of that kind of game that they play? Again, I think it's just a repeating pattern. This is how the dialectic advances. This is how the left has advanced almost all of its ratchets. You know, again, they pretend that this isn't happening. It's not going on. You're paranoid. You're pushing things. It's for your profit. Your glorification.

You're growing an audience, whatever, all this stuff. And then they go ahead and move forward with it incrementally each time. And by the time, all the things that were predicted happen, it's too late, the culture's cultural opinion is already shifted. The truth is that there are barriers that must exist that cannot be discussed. They cannot be debated. There are hard stops in our culture that have to exist because they protect something too precious and no one is allowed to get up to or across the line. And protecting children from sexualization has to be one of those. There cannot be movement. There cannot be discussion. There cannot be debate. We don't need to rationalize this. There's no reason the needs behind it, though there is obviously reason behind it.

The line has to be drawn in the sand and has to be unapproachable by anyone. There's a reason we place taboos like this because they mean something and the cost of crossing them is too high. We keep seeing these drag shows happening, especially this month, that are labeled all ages or family friendly. I saw one advertised by Drew Hernandez. He went to one in Arizona where he took a video of these family-friendly all-ages pride festivals. I guess it's not a drag show, but there are drag queens there. And, I mean, it's sex. It's sex.

It's not inclusivity. It's not acceptance. It's sex. These parades that claim to be family-friendly, you see the kids and the infants in the background and the parents just cheering on. Like, this is so great while they see a man and leather chaps being whipped by another man. And they're like, yeah, this is family-friendly.

It's fine. You're such a weirdo for even thinking that. that there's anything wrong with this. I mean, 10 years ago, I think everyone would have said, yeah, that's, okay, you know what, you adults, you want to do that. You even want to go out on the street and celebrate that that's fine. Don't include children. I mean, why is there this absolutely relentless push to include children in this stuff? And why does it seem like the right noticing and advertising it has not hindered it at all? Well, I think it's because if you're going to create a level of tolerance for something that is obviously a moral problem, then you have to

start a young. You have to indoctrinate people. You have a natural hierarchy. I think that people recognize of how families should behave and what like a healthy family formation is. And when you see what's happening here, it's very clear that it's important that this be pushed down on kids younger and younger. Everyone a few years ago, like you're saying, understood that pride was like a Mardi Gras thing. It's kind of a no holds bar thing that was for adults. And maybe you thought that was okay and maybe you didn't. But you understood at some level at least it was adults involved and that's who it was for.

But it's very clear now that we're at the point where we're debating about what kind of pride should be allowed. How explicit a pride event can be and still be labeled family friendly. You're even seeing conservatives do this, right? Saying, oh, yeah, we have to go return to the tradition of pride three years ago. You know, when it wasn't leather daddies running around and exposing themselves to children. Yeah. And it's just, again, this complete lack and willingness of people to stand on principle and say, we understand where this goes.

And we don't care how you're going to depict us. And we don't care what names you're going to call us. And we don't care what kind of list the SPLC is going to put you on. Either you care about your children or you don't. Either you care about the future or you don't. And you got to make your stand somewhere. And if this, if you can't stand up against this, the active. destruction of the innocence of children for all kinds of political and more deeply and dark

gratification of a segment of a society, then you can't stand up against anything. Yeah. And, you know, I just don't really have a whole lot of faith because of what you just said, that's the right in general, however you want to define that, whatever parameters you want to put around that, are really up for this fight. Because as you said, they're like, let's, okay, let's just go back to 2015. Let's just go back to celebrating Obergefell. Or maybe if they're crazy, let's go back to 2012 or 1995 or whenever they feel like the golden age of liberalism was where we all got along and things like that. But they don't see, they really don't see the connection. Or if they even do see the connection between breaking down all the boundaries that leads to breaking down

of the boundaries that we're seeing broken down now, they don't want to admit it. They're They might be okay with being called a hate group for being anti-petithelia. They might be okay with being linked with Q&N for being anti-child sex trafficking. They may be okay with being called transphobic. They're not okay with being called homophobic, which is why I think the strategy of the left can be very effective. Even in the email that the Rolling Stones person put to me, at first she said you're transphobic and then she said LGBTQ.

So it's lumping all that in. And now I don't care. Like I'm like, well, I'm a Christian. And yes, I do believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. I don't care what you call me. But most people on the right do not want to be seen as anti-gay. And they're very, very scared to have a conversation about the entire alphabet. Yeah, the Motten Bailey tactic is a classic one.

You use something that's been made socially acceptable, pretend that that is the thing that you are defending, but you use that to advance a more radical position. And this is something that you said once you have kind of made that group sacred, once you have made that thing unacceptable to criticize, then it becomes your shield and advancement for more radical portions of your agenda. And this is exactly what goes on. They say, oh, well, you're attacking trans.

Well, then you're attacking everything. And you see, it's kind of sad because I know people mean it. I see these people and they're like, LGBT without the T. That's the new conservative position. Yeah. And this will stop it because it shows that there's something different here. And we support and protect all of these things.

But this is the one step that's too far. And it's like, oh, guys, you didn't pay attention to conservative movements for the last, like, 30 years. Because they've done this at every step of the way. And the truth is either you have a cohesive moral vision or you don't. And if you don't, you'll be picked apart by those who do. The left has a moral vision. They have a way that they want to reorder society. And they are very sure about the righteousness of their cause and their need to move it forward.

The right does not have that. which is sad because the right should have the truth of real religion. It should have the courage of their convictions. They claim a holy book. They claim a church. But therefore more willing to betray that than left is to betray its world vision that doesn't have a holy book and doesn't have a church. And that's pretty sad.

Hey, this is Steve Deast. 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 Steve Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. I think it's a lot easier not to make excuses for the right, but as you have mentioned, really the progressive vision in crude terms is just to tear down all the boundaries without asking if these boundaries were protecting us from something that's really dangerous. Let's just tear them all down. You don't really have to agree with someone on how to demolish something. You take a hammer. I'll take, you know, I don't know, something else, some other kind of tools, some kind of mallet.

And let's just tear down this wall. You don't have to agree on the tactic. You don't have to agree on the tools. You don't even have to agree on the vision. The vision is demolition, period. But when your vision is to build something, there's a lot of disagreement and discussion that has to go into that. Like, what kind of materials are we going to use? What kind of tools are we going to use?

How are we going to lay the bricks? What's the foundation going to look like? That's really what we can't agree on. And then, like, what is this going to look like and what kind of structure will really hold? So that's, I think, one reason. why it's much more difficult to form coalitions on the right because we can't decide on how to build something. It's so much easier to just, you know, get together with all kinds of people that you might really disagree with and just destroy. Yeah, that's exactly right. The left is really at

the end of the day a mystery cult of power. It's a coalition of people who benefit from the destruction of our current society. Each piece of traditional morality, each piece of traditional hierarchy that gets dismantled releases political energy and allows the left to punish their enemies and reward their friends with different benefits, with different opportunities, with different cynicures. And that is something that is easy to get everybody on board with. Hey, if you are on board with dismantling this thing, we'll hand you a piece of the pie that we take from someone else. This is a really classic strategy for any political coalition, really, take the wealth of other people and hand it out to them. We've heard this before. In this case, sometimes it's social capital.

alongside with the money, but it's still the same strategy. And so I think you're right that that is very difficult. And the right is also in a state of denial. We want to believe that we can go back to a neutral civilization. We can return to some kind of mythical, liberal consensus that existed maybe in the 1990s, if you're kind of a moderate liberal and maybe the 1950s, if you're more classic conservative. but we like to pretend that there's a moment at which like basically all of our institutions were neutral and they didn't have any moral values and they just let everybody kind of pick their own thing and do their own thing. But of course that was never true.

And the attempt to return back to that is hollow because the left has a moral vision. They have something that they want to give to people that gives them meaning and purpose. Now, I think it's a crude, ugly caricature of a real moral vision or real religion. but at least it offers a narrative that people can follow. They can engage in. They can find meaning in. The right refuses to invest in any of these things. We have a few people who say it has to be Christianity.

We have a few people who says it has to be like basically Barack Obama liberalism. We have a few people with like, no, libertarians. We can't have any of this stuff. And because there's this constant inability to coalesce around one of those things, there's no way, like you said, to really move forward together. And until people admit to themselves, that we have to forge that, then you're not going to have a really consistent movement, I don't think. Yeah. I think that the conversation about can you have, can we promote LGBT without the T?

That conversation is really like a symptom of the greater problem because I am sympathetic to that. I really am. And like I appreciate a lot of work that is being done in those, especially like the so-called turfs or the feminists who maybe identify as LGBT. and they're like, you know, it's fundamentally different. I can sympathize with that. They would say they're not denying reality. They're not pretending to be something that they're not. They're trying to enter into spaces that are not theirs. They're not violating other people's rights. I can sympathize with that and I can understand why people, other people are very sympathetic to that. But again, it goes back to like, but what is our moral vision? What's the foundation for all of this?

is the ideal that we are going to hold up? What is best for society? Like, we actually have to agree on those things. If you think that there is something unique about a man and a woman, that doesn't just inform what you think about gender and gender ideology. It's going to inform what you think about marriage and parenting too. It's really, like trans women are women is, to me, like the same exact math as love is love. It's the same, it's the same thing. basically you're saying men and women and all these people, we're all just interchangeable. We're all just clumps of matter. Like there's nothing unique to you as a man.

There's nothing unique to me as a woman. There's nothing unique that I bring to the table as a mom or as a wife. Nothing unique that my husband as a dad and as a husband brings to the table that's unique. And so it's the same, it's the same fundamental premise that like we are our own gods. We get to self-identify. We get to self-declare. we get to redefine marriage and family how we see fit. So even though I can really sympathize with like the separation at the end of the day, it's all the same, in my opinion, faulty premise

and you can't build a cohesive society on that. Yeah, I mean, I hear you, these people at least are principled, right? If nothing else, they're willing to stand on some kind of principle. But at the end of the day, they're just revolutionaries who fell off the tip of the spear. The revolution finally got to dismantling something they cared about. And all of a sudden, revolution had gone too far. But of course, it had been doing that beforehand. All of the principles that they're trying to rest their identity on were already dismantled by the very movement that they're now decrying against, even though they were on board with that revolution all the way up to this point. The truth is either we are people who have limitations,

who are, have purpose inside a tradition, inside an identity, inside a hierarchy that is ordained and maintained by things that are beyond our control, or we are just re-rangeable meat legos, and we can just become whatever we want at any time. And there's really no way to break that logic. You have to go one way or the other. Either nature matters, either those things, the designs of things beyond our understanding or power to control matter, and we have to honor them, or we don't. And that's the problem of kind of the rights revolution. we are obsessed with rights, but rights have now gone far beyond what government can't do to us and it become what we must do, what government must force for us to have our theory of our own autonomy.

And that's, I think, the break that a lot of people had. But the problem is, again, that dismantling that got you there is the reason this is available now. It's all connected, like you said. Yeah. I always say it always goes back to the first chapter of the first book of the Bible. God created the heavens in the earth. because if you believe that, if God created it, then he's the authority over all of it. He says what is and what isn't, what's right and what's wrong, what's true and what's false,

what's male and what's female. If you don't believe that, if you don't believe in the God of Scripture, you will inevitably believe in the God of self. And you will be self-defining self-declaring. I mean, to me, that is like the fundamental disagreement that everyone has, but even particularly on the right. Now, some people agree on that, but we disagree with how it actually manifests itself in politics and culture and all of that.

But I want to talk to you about like this failure to be able to coalesce around any moral vision by looking at a tweet from Ted Cruz, Senator Ted Cruz, that people at least on the left, and maybe a lot of people, Republicans would say he's like the furthest right that you could possibly get. Some people would say that. And he tweeted about, he quote tweeted the New York Times, the New York Times tweeted about this Uganda law, which is a they describe as a punitive anti-gay bill, which does public or punit. Punic. homosexual behavior, but issues the death penalty for a homosexual child rapist and also penalizes, like knowingly infecting someone with HIV. Ted Cruz, quote, tweets it, says this Uganda law is horrific and wrong. Any law criminalizing homosexuality or imposing the death penalty for quote unquote aggravated homosexuality is grotesque and an abomination. All civilized nations should join together in condemning this human rights abuse hashtag LGBT. What does this mean? And why did Ted Cruz of all the things, of all the human rights atrocities in Uganda,

by the way, which is why I'm like, I'm not this law too. I'm like, there's so many human rights violations going on in Uganda. Like, why is this to highlight of all the terrible, terrible things that go on there against all different kinds of people? Why did he choose to highlight this law and not the others that are clearly discriminatory against all different kinds of people in Uganda? Because Ted Cruz is the subject of the media, because we're in a media-controlled state. And the media told him, too. Look, you can look at Africa. And like you said, there's tons of horrific things happening there. But sub-Saharan sodomy laws are not like the primary thing that you think he would be drawn to. I mean, like you said, there's plenty of atrocities in Uganda itself that you could mention.

There's also places like South Africa that are trying to limit access to water based on race. But you'll never see Ted Cruz talk about that and we all know why. Yeah. And that's the thing. And let's just be specific in case people don't know. It's based on race. Like if you are white, you get later access to utilities like water. So just so people know it's not preferential treatment toward white people, it's the other way around.

Which is why he wouldn't say anything. Yeah. It's minorities in. South Africa. But in South Africa, minorities are whites, but also other races, other tribes that aren't the predominant. And yes, they're all getting, they're all getting lower treatment in many areas. They're not allowed to hold specific positions in government. They're not allowed to have enough people on different company boards. They just have racial quotas on everything. And the majority has to be in charge of all of it. And the minorities, including whites,

have to be at the bottom of it in a lot of these situations. But of course, Ted Cruz isn't going to talk about any of that because the media is going to destroy him for talking about that. And they're going to praise him for talking about what Uganda is doing over there, right? Now, Ted Cruz lives in a country that is currently trying to put a man in jail for 10 years for tweeting a meme about Hillary Clinton. Yeah. Right. Ted Cruz lives in a country where people who go to the capital and protest and admittedly, maybe some of them, you know, go in and they riot and deserve some kind of criminal penalty, but go to jail for over a decade. some of them for not even entering the building. Ted Cruz lives in a country where all of this stuff is occurring, but his energy is spent on this issue. Why? Because he knows that he'll get

points. He knows that this is where he will be celebrated. And that's the sad thing. He won't even be celebrated, right? Most of these people will still hate him the next minute later. Most of them will just use his statement to sneer. Oh, look, the rights reacting to this. They're so, they're such bad people. They'll even attack this guy who's the worst human in the world who happened to say one true thing for a second, right? But he still does it because he feels that compulsion to win those popular points. And that is very sad. Maybe Ted Cruz really does have a problem with this law. Fine. But every time he spins the capital, that political capital, that communications capital, he's making a choice as to like what he's going to acquiesce to. And it's very clear why he made that

choice here. Yeah. And, you know, I'm sure he would say his probably defense would be, look, I do spend energy on all those other things. I can do multiple things at once. This was one of the things that bothered me. But he would probably say I spend time on a lot of the things that you're talking about that are really important, but I just wanted to do this. Now, I think that's true. And I appreciate Ted Cruz in a lot of ways. I appreciate a lot of the good, you know, strong legislation he's put forth and all of that. So I don't want it to seem like I'm discounting that or, you know, I don't mean any disrespect, but I just happened to agree with you that he might be doing some good things, but this is to score points, especially, and you pointed this out, which I thought was interesting,

especially the hashtag LGBTQ. Tell me the significance in your mind of him including that entire hashtag. Yeah, he totally could have just said, hey, I don't think that two consenting adults should go to jail for this, or I don't think it's the state's business to do this. And you probably shouldn't do that. And that would have... Still weird to, like, bring out... It's in Uganda. Still a bit weird that he went out of his way to select that particular issue.

But at least he could have just said, I have a general principle that I don't think the state should do this. It could apply to anything, not just this one particular thing. And so I'm just pointing this out. Fair enough, right? Again, weird that would be... You go out of your way to do that, but that would at least be consistent with his reasoning. But when you specifically include the hashtag, including the T, right? right, including the queer and trans stuff, he is specifically including and accepting the left's

frame about the community that this creates, right? He's buying into the narrative that this is all one thing, that it has to be connected. And maybe they're right, right? Maybe they are right. Maybe these things are inexplicably separated, which is something that, you know, the right is really busy arguing against people out of something that they seem, for the most part, more than fine to include. But either way, the point is he's going out of his way to include what are supposed to be parts of the community that the right is now opposing, right, in some way, shape, or form. And again, that just gives the obvious, you know, the point that he sees these things as inherently connected and that he's trying to appeal to this, that this eventually will be the way forward for the right. They will look for a way

to pander to this stuff. And that's a reason that he's going out of way to include that hashtag and see himself as signaling to that entire quote unquote community. Yeah. I see the right doing this a lot. And, you know, I probably was more guilty of it a few years ago than I am today. I think a lot of people, myself included, have just gotten into the realm of really not caring. But I see a lot of Christian conservatives say things like, it's not transphobic to be against the maiming of children's bodies, or it's not racist to point out statistics or whatever. And I'm like, it doesn't matter if it is. It doesn't matter if it is. It's okay. I don't like, okay, maybe it is transphobic. Maybe it is transphobic to say that I don't believe that men can become women. Maybe it is homophobic to say that I believe in

traditional marriage. Why do people even waste time defending themselves against those accusations? Because look, the left, whether you like it or not, the left has already claimed authority over defining those words, most words, actually, but especially those words. Like, I don't see the point in trying to reclaim them or redeem them or like, redeem feminism. I see that a lot still on the right. Let's reclaim feminism. Why? Why? I don't want to defend myself against being an anti-feminist. I don't want to defend myself against being anti-transphobic. I want to spend all my energy on actually saying what is true. And they're going to call you trans-that's the thing. They're going to call you transphobic anyway. It doesn't matter. Even if you say, like you, I don't know

if you've seen the whole Clayton Kirschoff thing, the LA Dodgers pitcher who he issued, you know, this statement last week about the Sisters of Perpetual indulgence, this horrible, sacrilegious, anti-Christian drag group that sexualizes the crucifixion publicly. They were, they were honored, or going to be honored at the LA Dodgers Pride Night. And basically, as an outspoken Christian, he comes out and he says, well, you know, I have a problem with this. Not because it has a anything to do with the LGBTQ community. It has nothing to do with that. There's nothing to do with that.

It just, I don't think making fun of a religion is nice. And then he's now come out and said, well, I'm still going to play the game at which the sisters of perpetual indulgence that are making a sexual mockery of my faith are going to be honored. And his reasoning was, well, we're called to love everyone well. We're not going to make it, Oren. We're not going to make it. If that's like, if that's the stance of a lot of people on the right, and I think that it is, like, to carve out the tiniest, like, piece of opposition that you can.

So maybe you can stave off criticism of being called homophobic. And you're still going to be called homophobic, which is really my point or transphobic, then, like, we're just, it's hopeless. It's totally hopeless. Yeah. The left thrives by dialectics and the right dies by them. We don't understand how this works. What does that mean? It means that when you have a standard that is in a, in a, unassailable and you are standing behind it no matter what, no matter what the consequences, no matter what the language being thrown at you, that shows something to people.

I know they may not always say that they respect it, but when you are unwilling and unbending, you show leadership. You show a dynamic quality and an understanding and a rooting in truth that means something to people. that's what I think the right flourishes in the left flourishes in the dissolving of those things like we talked about the ripping apart of those standards

the breaking down of those things and so every time they can get you into a conversation a debate over each little wedge of those things they get to peel off a little bit of it each time may not seem much at first but by the time you're done with it

the whole thing is dismantled and so that's why it's so dangerous for the right to do things like engage with leftist news Newspeak. Homophobia is not a word. Transphobia is not a word. These are not real things. These are political. Why did they attach phobia to the things? Anyone remember Islamophobia? Remember, people literally blew up buildings, murdered thousands of people. And what's the first thing they slapped on the side of that? Phobia. Should you be scared of being murdered when someone blows up

a thousand or more people? Yes, that's not phobia. That's rational assessment of danger. But the term became politicized. The Newspeak was adopted. And all of a sudden, noticing a pattern of like, hey, all these people blowing stuff up seemed to share a common thing was phobic. And you don't want to be phobic, right? That means you're weak. You're scared. You're irrational.

That's what these terms are. They're politically charged Newspeak created specifically to box people into something. So, no, I'm not homophobic or transphobic. I just agree with the Bible. I just agree with most people throughout American history and the morals that they had. That's how people need to approach this stuff. But of course, if you're somebody who doesn't have those things, and like we said, this is a problem with the right. So many people on the right can't invest in those things because they don't really believe them,

because they're the part of the coalition doesn't value any of that stuff. And so they need to find some kind of weird, wishy-washy middle ground. They don't have a solid basis and root of natural and higher order on which to stand. And so they have to come up with this stuff. And so what do they end up doing? Defending themselves against all those little wishy-washy words using all those statements hedging all of their bets. And in each one of those battles, they lose a little bit more ground until eventually, you know, Ted Cruz is talking about whether or not it's illegal to, you know, have sex with kids in Uganda. I saw a tweet, I think it was from Logan Hall the other day that he was like, one of the differences between the right and the left is that the left rewards their fringes and the right punishes theirs. I don't think it's necessarily bad to on the right say, oh, that truly is a fringe and most of the right doesn't believe that. But he was talking about Chesa Boudin in particular. I think he was what, he was the DA of San Francisco, completely soft on crunch.

his parents were deadly terrorists. He's a radical progressive. And of course, his policies and refusing to actually crack down on crime led to all kinds of murder and chaos as it always does because progressives don't understand human nature. And now he is being rewarded with, I forget the university, it's Yale or one of these Ivy Leagues that he is now going to be a professor of criminal justice at this place. Lori Lightfoot, the same thing. She scored a prestigious position at Harvard. There is no record of success whatsoever from Lori Lightfoot as the mayor of Chicago, but this is what happens. They take care of their own. You know that Katie Hobbs is, I think it was the press secretary or someone who worked for her, the governor of Arizona, who made a meme the day

after those Nashville kids were shot by the woman who identified as transgender. She made a meme shooting transphobes. And sure, she was made to resign. she's going to get taken care of. She's not going to be excised. There's no one on the left who is going to be like she's too radical to touch. This Rolling Stones reporter, E.J. Dixon, she is literally advocated for pedophiles and for, you know, trying to satisfy pedophilia with child sex robots. She's a senior writer at Rolling Stones.

She wrote that back in 2014. There's nothing too radical. I think that someone on the left can say that's going to stop them from getting new opportunities. There are a lot of things on the right that you cannot say if you want to continue to be friendly with mainstream conservatives. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, look at the weather underground. They literally set bombs and tried to murder people and ended up all getting like professorships. I think that was Chesa Budean's parents. Quite possibly. But I forget the, the guy who is Barack Obama, one of Barack Obama's mentors, right, after being in the weather underground.

So absolutely, these guys get cincures in universities. They become influential inside the Democratic Party. You can literally become a terrorist and then get paid a ton of money and influence the next president of the United States. That's how the left treats their radicals. The right understands the game, whether they'll say it or not. You can't go beyond certain barriers. You can't go beyond certain things. And if you do, you are destroyed forever.

You're not in some little way, not some minor, oh, we'll get you a job somewhere else. Don't worry. you are obliterated. You can't earn money. You can't do, you can't bank. No one in the right will talk to you. Everyone on the right understands that. And so that means the left can go as crazy and insane and as far left, all the way literally to terrorism if they want. And that will only advance their careers in leftist politics. The right has to be careful about saying anything at all because at any moment they're going to get destroyed. And the thing is, the right is really excited to aggressively police people on the. the right for the benefit of the left. They love it. They love to, the people, you know, love to run out and go, oh, I'm not as bad as that guy. See, now you can write a New York Times article about your strange new respect for me, right? And that's what Ted Cruz did when he was going back and forth with Jenna Ellis. Like, you know, that's what he was trying to do. See, I'm not her. Yeah, absolutely. They know, again, at the end of the day, as the people who we

paint as the craziest far right, or now that we paint, the media paints, as the craziest far right people like Ted Cruz are really not at all. They're really not that far right. Look, look at Donald Trump. Donald Trump is a blue dog Democrat. Okay. Totally. He doesn't have almost any opinions that would have been considered, you know, right wing just a few decades ago. He's more radical than Barack Obama was on gay marriage and pride acceptance. Right. And this guy is a crazy Nazi fascist, right? He's the farthest right anyone can have. But we laugh at that, but the left understands what they're doing. They're anchoring the political views in the United States. They're creating an Overton window that stops at Donald Trump. The farthest right you can be is a blue-dog Democrat from a few decades ago. That is the craziest

right-wing position available. And no one could be beyond Trump because he's already a crazy Nazi, right? And so if you went beyond Trump, then what would that make you? And so by establishing those barriers by making sure that you can punish anyone beyond that, even on the right where the right is incentivized to do that, you ensure that we always move left. That's key. I don't know if there's any true social conservatives on the federal level. Maybe Chip Roy, I really like Chip Roy, the representative from Texas. But when it comes to Congress, like, are there any even Republicans who are willing to say something that the vast majority of people in the United States were saying just in 2015. I mean, 60% of Americans in 2015, right before Obrugel, believed the homosexuality is

something that shouldn't be mainstreamed or upheld in society. Obviously, that has dramatically changed over the past few years. But there's not even any Republicans that I can think of that are willing to stand up and say what most people were saying in 2015 that, you know what, consenting adults can do what they want to. But as far as what we're going to build this foundation of what we're going to build our country on as far as what we are going to uphold, as far as what is right and biblical, it's marriage between a man and a woman. I don't know that I know I can think of any Republicans that would stand up and say that today. We have a serious mechanical problem, and it's that the left is built on its right to rule.

They are built on their right to expand government and control everything. They have no hesitation to say this. They want to unify everything. They want to centralize power. and they want to be able to dictate to everyone what the morality of the country will be. On the right, we believe in subsidiarity. We believe in federalism. We believe that communities best govern themselves. And the government shouldn't have an overarching role in controlling everything. I think that's actually a better system in many ways.

I don't think civilization actually scales to the size of our now global empire that we call the United States. And it would be better if we could find a way to devolve power back down to those things. at the moment, that doesn't matter because that's not the reality we face. The truth is we have a Leviathan state. And the truth is that Leviathan state is wielded in a way which it enforces these norms across the board. And if those massive institutions which now dictate every aspect of human life are ordered towards your enemy's morality, that is what everyone will adopt.

Yeah. And we just have a problem because that gives an out to every GOP congressman, because they can always say like, but we don't believe that. We don't believe that's the role of government. We don't believe that's the role of state. Well, that's great. But you're not doing anything to dismantle that. What's the libertarian record on dismantling the state? What's the conservative record on dismantling the state? Utter failure. Just an unbroken string of complete devastating losses while the left advances and centralizes the state and pushes all of this stuff because the right implicitly says we won't take part in it. Do you think DeSantis is a break from that? Like, do you

think that he sees things a little differently than the average Republican as far as using state power to fight back against what you would call the total state like Disney? I think he's definitely a change in that in a good way. It's a positive thing that Ron DeSantis is obviously willing to say, we don't do that here. And the state will tell you we don't do that here. I think that while those are all positive advancements on Ron DeSantis, I still don't think that even he is willing to say or look at kind of the depth of kind of the problem we have, which isn't to say that, you know, the things he is doing and the actions he's taking in Florida are not positive advancement. They actually, they absolutely are. But I think even he is kind of

everything is couched in this limited government vision. Everything is couched in kind of, in a way that I think still perhaps limits for some people. But maybe those are steps that get you to that understanding. We really, are in a position, again, where if Ron DeSantis was in the White House tomorrow, I don't know that he could make the changes that even he wants to make because the infrastructure that is kind of littered throughout the deep state, as a lot of people like to call it, is so thoroughly progressive that even if he went in with the mindset to completely use state power and completely shift the country in an opposite direction, he would be fighting the entire internal state apparatus the

whole time, which we see what that did to Donald Trump. I mean, Donald Trump literally just got lied to by his generals about what the military is doing. He's the commander in chief. That's by all definitions, a coup. And it happened. And we just don't talk about it because then we'd have to think about what that means about the Constitution. Yeah. Yeah, that's interesting. I mean, I do think that it does seem to me that DeSantis would go into the presidency with the thought that I'm going to rework all of this, just things that he's done in Florida, like actually go after those prosecutors. with power and say, no, you're not going to do this. These Soros-backed prosecutors, I was very impressed by that move because I just don't see most governors do that. They kind of posture and they say,

oh, this is so bad, George Soros, but they won't actually do anything about it. Now, Republican governors have less of an excuse because you've got someone like Ron DeSantis saying, no, I'm actually going to do this and people like it. I think that is a huge benefit to the things that he's doing, that it gives fewer excuses to other Republican governors to do what they've always done, which is to sit on their hands and to say, yay, corporations come here, which is kind of the tactic that,

like, Nikki Haley is employing right now. Like, she actually had the audacity to say, oh, if I were in, you know, if she acts like she's like still, like, something in South Carolina, but she will say, she said, you know, I, if Disney wants to come here to South Carolina,

yeah, I'm so sure that the people of Columbia, South Carolina would like Disney and all of their policies to start coming in and infecting their schools with the different kinds of curriculum that they were in Florida. Like to me, that just represents another level of not getting it, of not understanding where in the world we are when it comes to the total state. And I want you to talk more about the total state because that's what you talk about a lot. What is it? And why are so many people blind to it still? Well, I think that all of us have noticed that government doesn't really work the way that we had it explained to us in our high school civics class. I mean, we're supposed to have a constitution, supposed to have a bill of rights, separation of powers, checks and balances, all that great stuff from Baron de Montescue that got brought into the Constitution that along with our democratic will expressed through the popular sovereignty, electing our representatives, all this stuff was supposed to check the power of the state, keep it controlled, make sure. that it only works for our liberty. It exists only to defend our rights and nothing else, right? This is all the stuff that Thomas Jefferson was promising the Declaration of Independence.

But now we look at our state and during COVID, they can just lock everybody inside and force everyone to wear masks and demand that they get a injection if they want to work and close down all the churches and arrest pastors. And by the way, abortion clinics are open, liquor stores are open, big dock retailers are open. Amazon's making profits out the wazoo as they don't have. to the Democratic Party, but all those mid-level businesses that were keeping the Republican party up, all of them had to close down. Who knew? Right? It seems like the power of the state, again, Douglas Mackey facing 10 years in jail for posting a meme. Like, where is the First Amendment, right? These are all supposed to be things that are defended, but we clearly see that's not the case. And people are wondering what's going on, right? Why doesn't the Constitution do that? And I think

what we're noticing is the total state. You know, when we lived, if we lived in, in Nazi Germany, or if we lived in Soviet Russia, we would understand why everything speaks with one voice. Because those are totalitarian states. They have a explicit top-down government that tells everybody what to believe and how businesses or organizations are going to run. What kind of propaganda is going to be pushed. But the United States, we don't have that. And yet our media, our corporations, our private institutions, NGOs, our government, our education system, all push the same thing at the same time. How does that happen if we don't have a Politburo? And I think that's what the total state is. It's that the fact that our Western liberal democracies didn't defend us from this tendency of power the way we thought that they did.

I want to put up some examples, some pictures that if you're watching on YouTube, you'll be able to see. And you have tweeted a lot of them out just showing the total state. Obviously, we know all the corporations that are pushing pride. I've actually been a little surprised. Some corporations I haven't seen doing pride this year, which is interesting. I haven't gotten into my analysis of why that is. Like companies that I know are not Christian conservative. I haven't seen posting rainbows. But it doesn't really matter because most major corporations certainly are. Target wasn't scared at all to push tucking bathing suits that could fit children, partner with an open satanist to basically threaten people who believe that men can't become women. The Department of Agriculture decided for some reason that they needed to light up their building in rainbow colors. And then they also put the rainbow pride flag emoji and the transgender flag emoji. So again, we've connected all of it.

There's no like boundary or barrier there. The Department of Defense tweeted this Pride month, we honored the service commitment and sacrifice of the LGBTQ plus service members and personnel who vote. volunteer to defend our country. This was tweeted out by Secretary of Defense, Lloyd J. Austin. And then the Army and the Air Force official Twitter accounts retweeted his statement. The Navy also issued its own statement. Remember, the Navy christened a ship, the U.S. in as Harvey Milk in 2021.

In the San Francisco International Airport recently named a terminal after him, I'm pretty sure that he's like a pedophile. So there we go. There we go. And then you've got the Veterans Affair or the VA Health Hospital outside Des Moines, Iowa. They tweeted out a picture posting of the flag in front of the VA, the trans and the pride flag put together. They're excited about that. And then you also have the Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona. He put up a picture of, I guess, what's in front of their building, an American flag, and then the trans pride flag underneath it.

So why is this the state religion? Even more than BLM, even more than some of the other progressive tenets, it seems like sexual preference and gender confusion are the things that they're hoisting up as like their idol, their emblem. Why is that? Well, you know, we have separation of church and state in the United States, or at least that's the kind of the modern idea, is that there's this barrier between the state and religion. And the state can't adopt any form of religion in its official functions. And whether we understand that or not, political restrictions eventually stretch down to our private, you know, kind of interactions as well, which is why corporations and all these things also basically banned all of those things from our private. our public square. But humans are deeply narrative creatures.

We're deeply religious. We can talk our pretense about how we've moved beyond this stuff, fairy stories, blah, blah, blah. It's such a lie. Like, at our core, we know that there's something beyond us. And we have to interact with the world around us. We have to put things in a moral framework that will be founded in some kind of religious narrative.

And so when we banned the use of Christianity or other traditions, traditional religions, from our public square, we created basically a bunch of selection pressures that would allow a system that can circumvent those restrictions to kind of take hold. And so the great thing about wokeness or progressivism, as I kind of prefer to call it, because wokeness has now become a term that's very, very difficult for people to get a handle on. But progressivism doesn't have a official holy book. It doesn't have an official church. And so because it's a ideology that does kind of bind these things and create a moral narrative and create a moral narrative and create, a kind of a spiritual framework, even though it's a secular, explicitly non-deistic framework, it is allowed into all those public institutions.

And because we are narrative creatures, there's this God-shaped hole that had to get filled. These organizations do have to orient themselves towards some vision of the good. And since all the Christian vision and all the other traditionally religious visions or banned from those places, the only one that could fill that void was progressivism. And so now we've slowly watched as progressivism, which has been the only thing that's been allowed to be promoted in schools and in universities and government organizations and corporations has basically pushed all Christianity out of the public square. And this means that they need a new way to have identities, a new way to bind things together.

And we have made that advancement of kind of civil rights. We've made that advancement of rights and kind of individual choice as like the key, loadstone for our religious narrative, the center part of this. And that's why all of these government organizations are now oriented towards this because it became our de facto state religion because everything else was banned. Yeah. Interesting. Romans 1 may manifest, I think. I saw that there was a tweet that said that there are 50 plus, maybe it was 100 LGBTQ advocacy groups calling out target for bowing what they would say to right-wing extremists and moving some of their pride displays to the back of the store and they're demanding that they put their displays to the

front of the store again, double down on their efforts to promote the mutilation of people's bodies. And something that they said I thought was interesting. They said there's no such thing as neutrality, that you can't be neutral in this fight. the left understands something that most people on the right don't. Like we were talking about, you know, liberals wanting to go back to 1995 or whenever they believed that everything was neutral. Now, that was just the time that we took, or maybe it's further back than that, but took Christian values being ubiquitous for granted.

We just didn't realize that what was being upheld were Christian values because we thought it was just, well, it's always going to be this way. But the left understands something that the right does it, that there's no neutrality. it's just not going to happen. So I thought that that was interesting. Progressives get that. Yeah, absolutely. We like to pretend that American values were just this organic thing that didn't have any connection to, you know, religion or tradition. But of course, the only reason that we thought these things could be neutral is they were all basically, you know, a version of the Protestant Christian ethos. The reason that we thought we could have kind of this level of separation of church and state neutrality was that we just kind of assumed that everyone in the United States would just be to figure. out kind of like what branch or what division of the, you know, Protestant Christian tradition

they would be following. There were still serious disagreements, but there was enough of a shared culture to make it feel like there was a neutral ground on which everyone could stand. And that's kind of how communities work. Like, there just is no way for two existentially opposed moral visions to exist inside a polity. It cannot happen. One will rule the other. One will separate from the other or one will eliminate the other. None of those are great options. All of those feel really icky for us, but there is a political reality that's

taking place here. And the left, like you said, is very aware of the stakes and they're playing for keeps because they know what's happening here. The right is still in denial about that fact and the continued inability to understand the friend-enemy distinction, to understand

the process that is occurring inside the United States is something that is going to harm the right until they they put a grasp on it. So what do you think can turn things around then? It doesn't sound like you're very hopeful. A lot of times I'm not either. Although, I mean, there are obviously good things that have happened.

I think the Supreme Court decision on Dobbs was the result of the efforts of decades and decades of really just grassroots people pushing back against abortion that eventually led to a law that made its way to the Supreme Court. But it took a really long time, a really long time. a really long time, the right basically serving up everything for politicians and begging them. They're saying, we're saying, we want this. We'll make it as easy as possible for you. We'll write the law. Just like put it in front of the governor. And it still took almost 50 years for it to happen. But that did happen. I do think some of DeSantis's moves and some other Republican states, you know, banning drag queen shows for kids, banning, you know, bodily mutilation and puberty blockers for kids. I do think some on the right are getting it.

But then, of course, I get really discouraged when I see people on the right, not understanding the moment that we're in or what sometimes people say, like, what time it is. So where do we go from here? Like, do you have any hope? What does that hope look like? I don't know. I'm just interested, like, to hear what do you think the next 10 years holds for us? Well, I don't have any short-term good news, but I think I have long-term good news.

Okay, I'm ready. So what we're seeing here is an understanding of the actual situation. So, for instance, when you look at Dobbs, why does that work, right? Did that situation work because of the large popular will expressed over time by the American electorate? No, it worked because the right took very particular care to apply pressure to very particular groups. and a group of elite people gathered together around a particular cause, focused on it relentlessly, put pressure on the right areas of American government, isolated those, and they achieved a significant outcome.

And that is something that I think the right needs to grasp. Sorry, but the popular argument is not what actually drives politics. So true. Argument follows. Exactly. California was voting against gay marriage, not that long ago. California. 2008.

And now Republican senators can't imagine a world in which they don't stand up to protect this sacred right. Right. You think Kevin McCarthy's going to be like I'm holding down the fort for the traditional family here in California. Even though I think the people of Bakersfield would probably, to your point, the people that he represents probably would be great with him doing that. People in Middle California are very conservative, but it's not about majority opinion. Right. It's the culture is drowned stream from power. Yeah. And when power told everybody, this is what we believe now and this is what we believe now. and this is what the law is, things shifted.

Why are companies woke? Because they're legally required to be. Because they will get sued into oblivion and find into oblivion by the government if they don't do what they have to do. Republicans, the right, conservatives need to grasp that. I think that we're seeing that with the shifts of those laws you're talking about. We have a lot of people complaining, oh, I can't trans my kid. I'm leaving. fantastic. That's good news. No, I'm serious. That's great news. We should sort. We should

encourage the great sort. You don't want to be in a place where you can't mutilate your children. Move to one where you can. You don't want to be in a place where they're mutilating children. Move to one where they can't. And by doing that, we can put people in communities where they can actually, once again, have solid, coherent values. One of the main problems, we love our economic mobility, right? That's what we hear all the time. Go out, you know, young guy, get a job, move across the country, leave your family, find a job somewhere else. That's the American dream, you know, but there's a problem. You're shattering communities. You're pulling out apart people with similar values, similar traditions, and you're scattering them across the country. And that's one of the big

problems we face is that we don't live next to people who agree with us anymore. Our, you know, our disagreements are by zip code, not by state. And that means that it's hard. for one state or another to have a coherent moral philosophy. But if you have a situation where laws are basically, I mean, the left already basically makes it illegal to be a conservative in many of the states in the United States. So return the favor. Make it impossible for people who want to do this stuff that are extreme to be in your state. You know, you want to have a partial birth of version? Well, don't live here. You got to go, right? And by doing that kind of stuff, we put a scenario in place where people like Ron DeSantis, strong governors, who are willing to make those advancements, can secure, you know, conservative hedges. They can create regional power. And I think that, and I love Ron DeSantis, but this is why I encouraged him, you know, not that he's listening to me. I don't have a Ron DeSantis bat phone. But I said this many times, it's more effective for him to set a standard for how power is assembled at the regional level and how to protect those things over time so that we can have.

a solid example of how the right can protect and grow areas of the country that agree with it, rather than go to the federal level and just get ground into the dust by the deep state. Yeah. And so I think the good news, the short term is that there's no immediate solution. But the good news is long term. We can create a scenario where these states become more self-sustaining, where they become more, they become more value homogenous, where we have people who actually have the same tradition, have the same values, live in the same place, and could create a society that has

one coherent moral vision that can actually oppose progressivism rather than being scattered across the 50 states and dying piece by piece to the leftist attack. Yeah. Hmm. Okay. Well, I guess that in some ways is positive, is positive news. Are you, are you worried or hopeful about the kind of grassroots activism? that we see on the right in the boycotts, in the pushing back against the drag shows,

and the showing up to the school board meetings. The SPLC just dubbed Moms for Liberty a hate group right next to the KKK. And that's, I mean, it's just the heat is going to get hotter, absolutely. But it does seem like there is a new fervor among the right to say, no, we're not tolerating this. Are you happy about that or do you think it's kind of fruitless in the short term? I think it's good. Not even fruitless, but counterproductive because they use it to then say you're terrorists and you're really the problem, all these poor victims who are just trying to twerk for children.

Yeah, no, I think that it's good, but it has to be properly utilized. So the popular energy is powerful. And if it's used and harnessed by a movement that understands what it's doing, doing, it can make lasting changes to institutions. And that is what makes a difference. The left doesn't care about any one given election because it owns so many institutions that the pendulum swing of democracy doesn't really matter because the leftist agenda is advanced through education and media and NGOs and the deep state and all of these things, no matter who happens to be in office. Things can move further to the left while Trump is in office, even if he opposes those things,

because all the leftist institutions are still pushing against it. The right can use this popular energy to create meaningful changes, the kind of thing that we're talking about with Ron DeSantis, things that actually do, that actually obtain power. But obtaining power has to become the goal, not just making a company sad about their lost profits, those kind of things, but saying, how do we use this victory to then parlay this into legislation, into institutions,

into requirements that will make sure that we have additional power to then win the next thing. If you just use it to be outraged and feel good in the moment to get that quick hit of victory,

but then it all subsides, then it becomes what you're talking about. The left can then swing it. And be clear, the left is going to do this anyway. The left is working to criminalize political dissent in the United States. That's a difficult thing to say,

but it's just the truth. The SPS, the Southern Poverty Law Center is doing what they're doing because they know they can pair with the FBI. And the FBI will use that to, uh, to attack and destroy the lives of people who don't want this stuff pushed on their children. Yeah. They are actively using a, the secret police of the United States to destroy political opposition. Again, terrifying thing to say out loud.

We've already seen it with pro lifers with Mark Hawke, that guy in Pennsylvania who was just defending his kid from this pro abortion harasser. I mean, he had the FBI, not just come like. Hey, we just want to talk to you what happened with this incident. But the FBI came into his home while all of his young children were there and he was arrested. So, I mean, that kind of thing is already happening, even as the pro-abortion terrorist basically go unscathed. Yeah, if they'll rate a president right before midterm election to rig the election, they'll certainly do it to you. And so to be really clear, that's why the SPLC knows what they're doing.

Yeah. They know, it's a strategy specifically designed. media matters. Yeah, they know what they're doing. They're specifically using this to wield the state. It's not a private organization doing goodwill things. It's a concerted effort to wield the state to destroy their political enemies. And so they're going to do that no matter what.

And so that means, that doesn't mean don't stand up. That doesn't mean don't take popular action. That doesn't mean do nothing. But it means make sure it counts. Make sure you're winning something when you do it. Make sure it's not just people, the mass of people will always be motivated by something that's winning, feeling good, feeling that momentum. There's nothing wrong with that.

That's great. But we just have to have a political class, an activist class, a movement that's disciplined enough to say, okay, now that you are doing that, let's turn that into wins down the road and not just a momentary thing that feels good, but then gets splashed back on us by our enemies. And I do think we are seeing that with some of the legislation being passed by governors when it comes to protecting children's bodies and children's rights. That wouldn't be happening if they didn't feel the pressure of the power of parents who are saying, no, no more. They wouldn't be doing that just to make a statement. They're doing that because they feel that the power has shifted a little bit, at least on that issue. And I think hopefully that's a good sign. Okay, Warren, where can people follow you, find you, listen to your show. Of course, I've got the show on Blaze TV. You can subscribe to the Orrin McIntyre podcast on all your favorite podcast platforms. I've got YouTube channel, Rumble Odyssey, Orrin McIntyre on Twitter and Gab, all of those things. Okay, awesome. Thanks so much, Warren.

Thank you. 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.