The Left's Most Effective Tactic

All right. Hello, ladies and gentlemen. I am actually in beautiful Santa Barbara right now with Young America's Foundation. But of course, we have to do an episode. Sorry it could not be live. Had to pre-record this one.

But today, we got an interesting one for you because our very own Christian Hines, the Oracle of Virginia, has his own show on YouTube now. And he's just published his first video. And he's actually talking about something I think is very timely and important to understand because there is a particular tactic that the left just loves to use that we fall for just about every single time. And Christian has a very unique way of discussing it. So, we're going to watch his video, promote his channel, and uh see what we think. I have not seen this yet, so I'm watching it for the first time with all of you. and I promised him I would critique it like the big brother or maybe perhaps uncle figure that that I am for him. So, let's go ahead and jump right in and check it out.

>> Over the last year, something really strange has happened. The same political movement that spent a decade telling us that the founding fathers were villains, our constitution was structurally racist and America itself was an illegitimate white settler colonial state built on genocide and slavery has now suddenly rediscovered a deep reverence for pretty much all of these things. The left has gone allin on embracing this aesthetic. They dress themselves up as patriots and cosplay as the founding fathers while attending protests under the tagline no kings. And many on the right are just staring at this completely dumbfounded. Didn't we just spend the last 10 years watching these same people essentially declared total war on the American mythos? All of us remember the cultural revolution that was the Great Awakening. We all lived through the 1619 project. the tearing down of statues and monuments, the incessant lecturing that America was never great to begin with, the very public character assassination attempts, and several of them were quite successful, against everyone from astrophysicists to CEOs, the relentless, personal, and ruthless attacks on white men for being the root of all evil in the world, the explicit attempt to shut them out of all institutions and elite career path. ways.

>> I I really like what he's doing here. I like the intro. I wish some of the stuff was a little bit smaller or it had a text wall that was readable. Um, but I don't know. This is a tactic what all what what if all the hist also uses and his stuff like just really does well. I just wish we had some of the charts to actually capture what he's saying because he's making a lot of good points here. And if you actually pause and read some of it, it it yeah, it's it's really good.

We were told there was nothing to celebrate about this country and that its only hope for salvation would be to hand everything over to the very people who framed their hatred for us as a universal moral imperative. So what exactly are we supposed to believe? That the founding fathers were irredeemably evil in 2020, but now they're sacred guardians of liberty to invoke against the current occupant in the White House. Why does it seem like there's a sizable chunk of the political divide who expects us to accept their appeal to things they themselves were trying to tear down just a few years ago? I think you know where I'm going with this. You've already seen the title of this video. At the same time, there's been this huge blow up over to what degree the American founding can be used as a political football by one side who openly hates this country. There's been a similar cultural battle over an anime that came out just a few years ago called Frian, Beyond Journeys End. A handful of left-wing anime fans have argued that like every other cultural icon of the last decade, FN obviously belongs to them. But there's just one problem. FN is as close to being explicitly right-wing as any anime.

I I want to say something in defense here real quick because like Matt Walsh especially hates anime and there there are some really bad stuff out there. It it was interesting. I I never watched anime growing up. Uh my kids like certain ones and one of the reasons why they liked certain animes was because a lot of it was it was the only cartoons that were devoid of wokeness um that that weren't like some of the explicitly Christian ones that you get on like Angel Guild or stuff like that. So there there were some good cartoons out there. Tuttle Twins is a good one, but when it came to just kind of watching kind of cool cartoons with storylines, they thought like most of the Western ones were garbage, but a lot of the anime ones were a lot more hardcore. And and they're they're not wrong. There's a lot of ones out there. So, yeah.

And it's right-wing in a way that explains virtually everything that's happening to American politics at the moment. In this world, demons exist and they've evolved a very specific survival strategy. They look almost exactly like humans. They have the same bodies. They have the same faces. They even speak with the same voices. The only thing that really gives them away are the small horns on their head. And you've got to remember, these things have spent centuries studying human beings and learning how to blend into society. They've picked up human speech and behavioral patterns, but none of it's real. The whole thing is a performance. It's a manipulative play with one purpose and one purpose only. To weasle their way into a position close enough to do what they actually came to do, which is to eat the humans themselves. And in one of the most memorable scenes of the first season, Firin's party encounters a demon that has taken the form of a young girl. Now, I want you to pay close attention to what happens next. The human hero of this party, Himmel, simply can't bring himself to strike this demon down. Even after it had just murdered and eaten another child. From Himl's perspective, all that he sees is a small and frightened girl, not a monster with no compassion for its victims. And so, he just can't do it. He can't swing his sword and strike this demon down because it goes against his own principles, his own moral compass, really his entire worldview. What happens next is that the village chieftain steps forward and offers to take the demon in as one of his own. He basically promises to raise it as a human and to show it love and compassion, but in doing so, he's playing right into the demon's hands. It has no interest in integrating into human society or reforming itself along humanity's moral order. All it's interested in is manipulating the emotions and principles of the humans around it in order to continue killing. And so tragically, the same principles that drove this family to open up their home ultimately result in the village chieftain being killed, his homestead burned to the ground, and his daughter nearly suffering the same fate as the first child that him failed to avenge. Finally, Frier steps forward to do what Himl couldn't. And in this moment, we learn everything we need to know about the world of Fyan. The demon cries out yet again for a mother it doesn't even have. And when Frier presses it on it, it finally admits that it's simply a magic word that keeps people from killing them. As FN herself explains, the point here is that demons use human empathy, immorality to their own. For those of you that are listening to this on audio, let me uh what she said was to them words are merely a means to deceive humans is that demons use human empathy and morality to their own advantage. Despite never adhering to those moral principles themselves, the entire thing is a trick designed to cause what would otherwise be the demon's enemies from recognizing themselves as such. This is why I said earlier that Fryin is deeply right-wing. So much so that there's an entire collection of memes pointing this fact out. And this one scene from a Japanese anime perfectly explains the current state of American politics today. I've summarized the phenomenon here in a tweet that ultimately inspired this entire video.

>> So I'll go and read this off for you for those early. It says, "Conservatives win an election. Leftists appeal to the Constitution, the rule of law, Christianity, and the founding fathers to ensure that conservatives never act against them. Leftists win the next election. They immediately discard all of these principles and begin ruthlessly imposing their will on society. They go way too far, lose the following election, and instantly go back to appealing to the Constitution. Conservatives, the Constitution, huh? Why do you keep using that word leftist? Because it stops you from killing us." That was Christian's tweet.

This has been the story of American politics for years, arguably decades even. The Constitution, the rule of law, separation of powers, checks and balances, federalism, the founders's vision for this entire country. All of these things are generational commitments on the right. We see them as essential elements to who we are as Americans. They have to be honored and defended even when doing so is painful and even when honoring them means sometimes losing. But this is exactly why the left appeals to these things even if they don't fully understand the reason why they do understand that these things carry an almost mythic power in the minds of conservatives. and it's a mythic power they're all too happy to exploit when it suits them. Perhaps there's no better recent example of this than this year's Democrat State of the Union rebuttal. Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger deliberately chose to deliver it from the chamber of North America's oldest legislative body in Williamsburg, just a few miles from the site of the first English colony at Jamestown and the birth of America's independence at Yorktown. And in this speech, what did we see? Explicit references to the Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, invoking the story of America's independence from tyranny. Direct appeals to >> what our founders envisioned. >> Spamberger even went so far as to quote George Washington and regurgitate the old conservative adage about law and order, yet somehow twist it into an attack on ICE. even after an illegal migrant from Sierra Leon with 30 prior arrests stabbed a woman at a bus stop in Northern Virginia. Keep in mind, all of this was happening at the same time the Democratic Party in the state she governs is advancing bills to terminate Virginia's cooperation agreements with ICE, limit the ability of law enforcement to share information with federal immigration agents, ban immigration arrests near courouses, and turn schools into ICE-free zones. and the same illegal alien who stabbed a woman to death at a bus stop in Northern Virginia. That all happened literally the day before her speech. And a week later, Spamberger refused to hand him over to ICE for deportation. Does she believe this is what the founders would have wanted? Illegal migrants from another continent coming here and killing Americans. How do you stand there in the birthplace of America, quote the founding fathers, and then go home and do everything in your power to govern in a way that would horrify them? The answer, of course, is that she isn't confused, and she's not being inconsistent. She knows exactly what she's doing. She's invoking the things she knows conservatives hold sacred because invoking them constrains conservative action. The moment her party is back in power and the Constitution becomes an obstacle rather than a shield, it will stop being a sacred document and go back to being a relic of white supremacy, just like it did before. And this gets to the fundamental problem at the heart of American politics right now. To conservatives, the Constitution is a civic bible. It's the cornerstone of America's identity. It's the guarantor of liberty for its people and the crowning achievement of our country's contribution to political philosophy. But to the left, the Constitution is something else entirely. They don't appeal to the Constitution because they believe in it. They appeal to the Constitution because you do. To the left, the Constitution is at best just a procedural tool to invoke when it gets you what you want. And at worst, it's a founding document of white supremacy written by white patriarchal slave owners to protect a system of oppression the progressives are determined to tear down, sometimes quite literally. It's the political equivalent of that same survival mechanism that demons have in the world of Ferin, which might conveniently explain why a subset of the left openly identifies with them in online discourse. But of course, these two views are not compatible. There's no political system on earth, no matter how well-ritten or long-lasting it may be, that can survive a dynamic where one side treats its founding principles as a bedrock of civilization and the other treats them as a means to deceive their enemies.

So, what does this all teach us? Well, for years now, I would argue that almost everyone on the right has been able to feel this, even if they've struggled to put it into words. The left has spent a long time essentially abusing deeply held conservative principles in order to force them into situations that actively harms them. And they've just expected to keep getting away with this as long as they can string together the right magic words. That's precisely what the demon does in Finan. It doesn't need to overpower him. It just needs him to hesitate and to doubt whether he's looking at an enemy at all. But this spell only has power over someone who believes in it. And this is what the right has been painfully slow to come to terms with. The Constitution, the rule of law, separation of powers, checks and balances, federalism, the founders vision for America. None of these things came first. the revolution did. The rules and procedures only came after the question was settled as to who this country belonged to and what overarching vision would govern it. Right now, there's a new battle being waged over those first order questions. And recognizing this isn't an act of cynicism or an abandonment of principle. To go back to the Ferrerin analogy for just a moment, when she strikes the demon down, does she somehow stop protecting the humans she cares about? Does she become the demon herself? No. She just stops pretending that extending mercy to something that will use that mercy to keep killing is synonymous with being merciful itself. Ultimately, the right doesn't need to stop believing in the Constitution or the rule of law. It just needs to stop extending these principles in a universal, automatic, and goodfaith manner to the very forces that have made it clear that they'll invoke them when convenient and discard them when they're not.

>> See, this is probably what we're going to end up talking a lot about is this whole idea of how do you actually execute this, >> but the founders built or stood for. It's actually the only way any of it can possibly survive.

So, that was called Furian and the politics of deception. and we can actually have the uh the link available for you there in the uh in the comments or in in the um in the info for the episode. I think um the the tricky part has always been this idea of how do you actually combat that without losing yourself in the process. Um, but he said something interesting early on where he talked about this has been going on for years if not decades. And and I want to show another uh quote here because I think it's relevant and it actually has to do with a comment that um Senator Fulbright made and it was referenced by Ronald Reagan um in his 1964 a time for choosing speech which if you haven't listened to it is is one of the best ever. But here here's what he says. Uh he says, "Senator Fulbright has said at Stanford University that the constitution is outmoded. He referred to the president, this was FDR, as our moral teacher and our leader. And he says he is hobbled in his task or excuse I think it might have been Johnson. He is hobbled in his task by the reactions restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document." So, if you had any confusion on whether or not this was something that was, you know, brand new uh to the Democratic party or whether or not it's been going on for a while, it's important to understand this has been kind of a a feature um a feature of progressivism specifically. If you look at sometimes they call Teddy Roosevelt the first progressive president or the first progressive in the progressive era, but he still had a a pretty dedicated um commitment to the constitution. Woodro Wilson was was really the first president who I would say really enshrined kind of what we consider to be modern progressive ideals from the sense of having like a massive bureaucratic state and that the constitution was standing in the way of him achieving the things that he wanted. um FDR with with the New Deal. I mean, just threatened to stack the court. Again, stacking the court's not new. When they wanted to deal with a crisis and they thought the way to deal with it was with more government programs, the more expansion of government power, they all saw the Constitution as standing in their way of doing it. Uh Lyndon Johnson did the same thing with respect to a lot of a lot of the the federal programs that he put into play. A lot of those federal programs became possible because of the 16th amendment to the constitution. Because it's important to understand that in a lot of these areas, it's not so much that the federal government is um directly imposing uh like a particular program on states because one of the things that's important to understand about the constitution is the nth and tth amendments. And if you look at how the constitution was written, it has enumerated specific and enumerated powers. This was made very clear in the federalist papers when they were trying to address the anti-federalist concern that the u that essentially the federal government would expand its powers rapidly and and without end. And people like James Madison and Alexander Hamilton and and Jay Jones said no that's not possible because the powers within the constitution are limited and enumerated. Well, lo and behold, Democrats and and some Republicans as well, but Democrats especially have always found ways to use things like a misinterpretation of the general welfare clause or a misinterpretation of the necessary and proper clause or a misinterpretation of the commerce clause to give to extend the federal government authorities that it never should have had. But those were all still limited before the 16th amendment. The moment the federal government was allowed to individually tax Americans no matter where they lived in the country, all of a sudden they had this this new capability to amass funds at the federal level. And then they can come forward and say, "Well, we're going to do this. We're going to do this. We're going to do this." And as soon as the states said, "Well, wait a second. That doesn't fall within the enumerated powers of the federal government." The federal government could say, "No, no, no. We're not forcing you to do this. We're not forcing you to participate. Instead, what we're doing is we're setting up a massive program with the taxes we've collected, and if you don't participate, you don't get your money back. So, the federal government under the progressive era was essentially allowed to extort us with our own money. And it's been growing ever since. And so from from as early as from as early as the early 20th century, so over a hundred years, uh, Democrats have been trying to find creative ways to get around the United the limitations uh, placed on the federal government by the United States Constitution and they've been quite successful because the moment you start handing out money and the moment people start to get dependent on that money or they have expectations toward that money, they want to keep it. Um when FDR was first setting up social security, there were some Democrats that said, "Well, we want to make this a program that's, you know, only for the extremely poor or the extremely elderly." And FDR insisted that everyone was going to have to pay into it. And his logic was is that everyone have to if everyone has to pay into it, they'll fight to keep it. And now you look at Republicans running for office, it's like, "We're going to save Social Security." Is it because Social Security is an incredibly well-run program and would perform much better than if the government just said, "Hey, you're going to have a private retirement account?" Absolutely not. But that wasn't the point. If you look at a lot of the influence um on New Deal programs, you can look look no further than fascist Italy or even elements of Nazi Germany. And that always surprises people when you actually read out the various points of Italian fascism that it mirrors so closely elements within the progressive era. But there it is. And the key to achieving those objectives within the progressive era was more government power. You had to have more government power and more government control. So, so why is all that relevant to what Christian is talking about here? Well, every time every time Democrats get a a certain amount of power, especially when they have the presidency, the House, and the Senate, it's always always an effort to expand government power as much as they possibly can in just about every area of our lives. And the moment we we hold up the Constitution as an example of why they can't or shouldn't do that, we we get the we get the Senator Fulbright comment, right? We get the, you know, the the president is our moral teacher and our leader and he is hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document. That's what they say when they're in power. But the moment we're in power, all of a sudden that antiquated document, you know, made by by rich white slave owners who didn't want to pay their taxes becomes the supreme law of the land as Christian described it. A kind of civic scripture that that we're supposed to appeal to and abide by. And that works on us, right? And it works on us because we give it value. Tina said something really profound in a in a podcast that the three of us were doing at once and she goes, you know, she goes, "Democrats invoke the Constitution like atheists invoke the Bible, not because there's any genuine passion for what the document says, but because they know it has authority with us." And that begs the question and and Christian Christian contends that there is a way to uphold and preserve the Constitution of the United States while at the same time protecting it and and really protecting ourselves from people that will invoke it uh but then never apply it to limit but never use it to limit their own power. And the question is is how how do you do that? Do you suspend habius corpus but only for the left? Do you do you deny freedom of speech but only for the left? Do you um you know deny right to trial but only for the left? Like how do you how do you do that? And I I think that the safest the safest way to do it is to understand something. the Democratic Party and and their electoral survival depends on something other than just either getting married, having kids, or, you know, raising their own kids to be liberal progressives. They can't survive based off of that alone. Why? They don't have enough kids. They abort too many children. And even when they do have kids, they tend to have smaller families than what you might consider Christian conservatives. So why do we keep losing? Well, we hand our kids over to the government for their education. Um we we allow Democrats to control to compete for and control culturally shaping institutions which give them over um outweighted influence with respect to the way that we view the world. We uh Democrats allow things like the mass importation of people from countries with diametrically opposed worldviews. I I got into a discussion with a student who was a German immigrant to the United States. Seemed seemed relatively patriotic, but he he took a lot of issue with this idea that being an American was anything other than adopting the ideals of of being an American of the Declaration of the and the Constitution. And it's fascinating because he's advocating for presidents and he was advocating for political positions that bear no resemblance to the philosophy that was enshrined in the Declaration of Penins Constitution. These are just things that are said because I would say, yeah, it's true that a big part of being an American is actually loving what this country was founded on and what it has stood for. Which means that you you could be someone that has generations of Americans in your lineage but still hate the country and be anti-American. You could be someone that just arrived off the boat yesterday who came here illegally who desperately wants to be an American and loves this country and what it stands for. I can make that distinction. But then we also make the distinction that if you massimp import people from cultures with diametrically opposed worldviews when it comes to economics, philosophy, social policy, economic policy, religion, well, that's not a recipe for social cohesion. But the moment you say that, you're a xenophobic instead of somebody that's capable of basic linear thinking and pattern analysis. And the the part that I totally agree with Christian on here is we need to stop believing the left when they invoke the constitution. We need to understand that they don't really care about it. They don't really like it. They just know it works on us. But we still need to ask the important question of okay, when they invoke it, do they have a point? So if they have a point, we're going to have to contend with that philosophically, but we shouldn't have to contend with it in such a way that gives them more power. And that's been the problem that I see going on right now. It's my biggest concern going into the midterm elections is that I'm watching a lot of conservatives that are understandably frustrated with what's going on right now. Sometimes they're frustrated with Republicans in Congress. Sometimes they're frustrated with the Trump administration. I totally understand the frustration over Iran. I do. I do. I I've really been trying to hold out hope that there was sufficient um sufficient strength among the Iranian people to overthrow the Ayatollah if we provided some space for them to operate. But so far that hasn't materialized. And and I don't say that with any joy. It's just a fact. And the bottom line is if we if we deploy a bunch of ground troops over there, I'm sorry, there's no way he wins the midterms. There's no way Republicans win the midterms under those conditions because it's not what the vast majority of Americans signed up for with the Trump administration. By the same token, if you look at all the there have been a lot of beneficial things we've done with the border with deportation. Uh there's been beneficial things with cutting government programs. There's been a big cutting government federal bureaucracy. That's all been positive. But you have a lot of conservatives that essentially take the position of either a I didn't get what I want and so now I'm going to punish or I along with the things I did want I got some things that I didn't so I'm going to punish. Or you get those you get those people on the right, the center right, who when they see uh liberals talking about due process or when they see liberals suggesting there's been a violation of the constitution, they don't really dig in to figure out what was going on, they just know that violations of the constitution are bad and so they can't support that. And I think what this really comes down to is Christian understanding and and an understanding I came to, especially after I watched the reaction of Charlie Kirk getting murdered, is that this is no longer just a civil disagreement between Americans that fundamentally love their country, fundamentally agree with the principles of the Declaration of Independence, fundamentally agree with the construction and application of the Constitution. You have a significant portion of America that truly believes in those things, loves them, and thinks they're essential while disagreeing on some other things. And then you have certain people that think those are things are fundamentally evil and bad and mistakes and need to be uh changed to a degree where you would never recognize them from in their original form. And those people don't want to be an Americans. That's what this comes down to. They they may like the geography. They may like the weather where they live. They may even like some of their politicians that agree with them, but they don't love America. Because America is more than a piece of geography. It is a piece of geography, right? But but it's it is also a sense of ideas. It is a a culture, a sense of economic, social, political, and for the most part, religious norms. And they don't like those norms. They want to change them. And so I I think when the left refers to the constitution, we need to understand something. First of all, they they have no idea of letting the same constitution that they want to limit us to limit them when they're in power. They will only allow it to limit them to the degree that they can't get away with it. That's it. But if the Constitution does have meaning, then we have to start asking some hard questions on are there times are are there ever times in a moment of crisis where you have to suspend rules? And that's the part that makes everybody scared and and understandably so. they should be concerned about it because once you start suspending the rules in a time of crisis, you end up getting more crisises. But by the same token, just understand that the left will be happy to commit c or or to uh create a crisis if one doesn't exist. So, I'm going to bring up an example of this, the filibuster. I know people who I I love and respect, who are just great thinkers and incredibly strong patriots who honestly believe that if the filibuster goes away, we're we're doomed. And and I I would have said that. I would have I would have defended the filibuster at all costs. And and now I'm just not so sure anymore. And the reason I say that is because I know the filibuster is going anyway. And by the way, it's not an institution of the Constitution. It's an institution of the Senate. It's a Senate rule. It is something the Senate can decide not to do. But the the real question lies with, okay, if we don't get rid of the filibuster and we can't pass important legislation, unless we have a 60 majority vote, a 60 senator vote, then are we going to be able to get anything done, period? Even if we come out of the midterms and and we hang on to the House and the Senate, what are we going to be able to get done if the if the left can just invoke the filibuster? And then if they invoke the filibuster to stay our hand and then the moment they get power they immediately get rid of it and then they stack the court and they do other things that they can get away with then what are we going to go back and what are we going to do? We going to tell them that that's outside of the norms and traditions of American culture. They know they don't care. So we are going to have to make some hard decisions with respect to what we do. I don't I don't want to I don't want to tear down the Constitution. I think the constitution still has to be applied because equal justice before the law is something that we agree on in this country. But can I point to one thing that I think is absolutely critical at this stage in the game. We have demonstrated in in a in a minuscule amount, but still an important one that the left cannot win without using our tax dollars against us. Conservative organizations, conservative groups, we we can do just fine. We don't need tax dollars to subsidize our efforts. The left does. One of the things we found with Doge was how much of our money was not being lost in fraud, waste, and abuse. It was being strategically spent to advance left-wing ideological objectives. And then as soon as the money dried up, all of a sudden they didn't have sufficient funds to keep doing it. That that's why you see Planned Parenthood lost federal funding for one year. One year and they started to have to close clinics, right? We we've got leftist billionaires, which we just did an episode on that, that are spending all kinds of money right now to try to create the impression in America that the right is totally in disarray. And I'm not saying that there aren't elements of the right that are in disarray. I'm not saying that everyone on the right is happy, golucky, and unified. But it's it's about time that we understand that we're not just dealing with the Democrats we were 30, 40, or 50 years ago. They were bad enough, but we're dealing with new ones. You know, in in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan never had control of Congress, and yet he could still get big things done. Why? Because there were Democrats that absolutely there were elected Democrats that absolutely fundamentally loved America for what it was. They just disagreed on certain things with tax policy, or they disagreed with certain things on regulatory policy, but they weren't like Senator Fulbright here saying that the Constitution is an antiquated document. But that that is the majority opinion of elected Democrats now. And you're not going to convince me otherwise because I've served with them. They will talk a very very good game about rules and process when it suits them and then they will ignore them the moment it stands in the way of them accumulating or executing power over us. So step one, real simple, you need, especially in the states, stop listening to Republicans that want to send billions of your tax dollars to higher educational institutions, which become nothing more than liberal ideological centers with a football team. And by the way, conservatives, wealthy conservatives who give millions of dollars to your old alma modders to get your name on the side of a building, you're part of the problem. I'm sorry. I don't care what your experience was when you went through that university. If you're not aware with what they're doing right now, understand what you are doing is you are paying for the privilege of having your children indoctrinated to hate you for creating the very wealth that university is relying upon to do it. It's the same thing with our public school system. Stop pretending that that the same public school you went to 20, 30, or 40 years ago is what your kid is going to because it isn't. Start coming up with alternatives. We need more states and more governors to do what Idaho just did. Idaho just passed a bill which opens up the firing squad for people convicted of child rape. You see, what's interesting is when you start passing hardcore legislation like that, you don't just get good results from a public safety standpoint. you actually drive away liberals. They hate it when they're not allowed to abort or to trans their children. And that's the sort of thing that we need to do. We need to wield power, legitimate power, when we have it in the ways that the left despises. That doesn't require violating the Constitution. It really doesn't. Like Christian said, we don't have to abandon the Constitution, but we better start using legitimate power in order to achieve our objectives. And and a big part of that starts with stop allowing our tax dollars to go and shape culturally shaping institutions in a way that we don't agree with. Can you imagine if just in one generation, if one generation we had a critical mass of Americans, which would be something like maybe 20 25% of the country pulling their kids out of indoctrination centers in the form of our public schools or higher ed universities that have decided to make that their defining characteristic. If we massively cut federal spending going into these 501c3s, these NOS's which are doing nothing but pushing liberal ideology, if we drastically reduce the size and influence of the federal government in areas where it has no business being because it's enumerated power is given no such authority. If we could do stuff like that, you would watch so much of the woke progressive infrastructure crumble before your eyes because they don't have the ability to sustain it on their own steam. It requires us to help them prop it up. So, at the very least, demand more out of your legislators. And the moment they don't give it to you, especially at the state level, the moment they don't get it to you, go look for all the legislators in a safe district that refuse to do hard things in red states and replace them. Do you know what percentage do you know what percentage of the population usually votes in these state house or state senate primary challenges? It might be might be on a good day 7%. 7%. Do you know how much heavier your your vote goes in in a district where only 7% of the population is voting? And that's the crazy part is once you get rid of them, it's like people forgot they were ever there. They seem so powerful until they're gone and then you replace them with someone good. I've seen it happen. It's happening right now in different states where people are taking it seriously. But that's got to be the first step because I will tell you this much. If we don't if we don't do that through the typical electoral electoral processes, if we don't do that through legislation, if we can't get it done, if the Senate is incapable of doing anything because of the filibuster, here's what's going to happen next. Democrats are eventually going to retake power. They're going to throw these things out and we're going to hit a point where you better hope you live in a solid red state with a governor that's willing to push back against what President Nuome has decided to do with his stacked Supreme Court. So, I think Christian makes a really good point. And look, I I'm not calling my opposition I'm not calling people that disagree with them. I'm not calling progressives demons. But the bottom line is I'm a Christian, man. I do believe in spiritual warfare. And we get we get taught as Christians that your war is not ultimately against flesh and blood. So I look at another human created in the image of Christ and I don't I don't ultimately see my enemy. But if they're going to allow themselves to be influenced in this way, if they're going to allow themselves to walk around parading themselves sometimes half-dressed in front of children, if they're going to allow themselves to celebrate the destruction of innocent human life in the womb, if they're going to insist that I be forced to subsidize their ideology and the indoctrination of children with my tax dollars. If they're going to do all of that, well then they chose to be my enemy. I didn't choose to be theirs. And and for too long, the left has treated us like an enemy. And the moment we stop disagreeing with them, they play the victim. I got to tell you, to to those of you on the right that you know, you saw what was going on in Minneapolis and said, "Oo, this is this is more than I signed up for." You need to start understanding that they escalated to that they escalated to that degree in order to get that reaction out of you. They are trying to manipulate you. And if you allow it to work, you you might be able to you might be able to get out of this life reasonably comfortable. Uh your children are going to grow up in something that is going to be hellacious. So, um go over and follow Christian on his YouTube. Follow Christian on X. Um I think he did some really good work on here. I'm really excited about this channel for Christian. Uh Christian's a great thinker. Christian I don't always agree. Uh but I always think he I think he's an important thinker and I think he's someone that's worth listening to. So, let's go. Let's go show him some support for this video. Uh, by the way, uh, my book, The Man Book, uh, 52 52 lessons that every every man should know and understand. It's actually coming out April 14th, but you can pre-order it now, right? And if you pre-order it, that kind of kind of helps boost it a little bit because, let's face it, nothing would make the New York Times more angry than have to declare my book a New York Times bestseller. So, uh, don't do it for me. Do it to piss off the New York Times. Once again, thank you very much for joining us. Christian, thank you for the great job on this very first video. We look forward to seeing many more. Um, once again, really, really appreciate you guys listening, watching. Um, I I hope you see what we do here is having some value. Um, again, I I obviously come from a Christian perspective, from a white right-wing perspective, but I do try to be honest in my analysis because that allows you to also hold me accountable when I'm not actually standing up for the things that I believe in. But once again, thank you very much. We'll see you next episode.