Transcription
Right now, the public, if you take a look, and I've done surveys in the US, Britain, and Canada, it's the public in all three societies leans about two to one against what I would call the woke position. And that could be teaching kids that Canada is a racist country or, um, you know, that there are many genders or whatever. So, it's roughly two to one against across 50 questions.
Let's say in a democracy, the democracy gets to set the curriculum. I think the majority of the population would be on board the idea of political neutrality and balance as they see it. And I think we have the numbers to, to institute that now. I mean, one of my pleaser politicians really need to upgrade the focus on culture. Uh, because you have a two to one. Yeah. A two to one majority. These are clear wedge issues. They divide the left and they unite the right.
A question like, you know, should Winston Churchill's statue be removed from Parliament Square? You know, if you take conservative voters, they are, you know, overwhelmingly strongly opposed to that. If you take Labor and and Green voters, um, and liberal Democrats, they're kind of splintered. Some are strongly in favor, but many are not. Uh, so, these are obvious issues to go after. Why haven't conservatives gone after them? Because they're scared of being accused of being a racist.
I'll give you another example which is affirmative action. Red states only four red states have got bans on affirmative action. 13 have bans on abortion. Now abortion is a relatively unpop and bans on abortion are relatively unpopular. They may have a one-third support across the US population. Bans on affirmative action might have a two-thirds support and yet there's very little of it in red states. What? How do we explain that? Well, we explain it first of all by the fact that this issue has not been important enough for conservative politicians. Hanania does a good job of talking about that and also that the abortion lobby, the gun lobby, they're very organized. You know, they put pressure on Republican politicians between elections. The anti-affirmative action lobby is totally disorganized and cannot hold conservative politicians feet to the fire if they do nothing about it. That has to change that organization between elections. We have to be putting much more pressure on our politicians to raise the importance of this issue and to deliver on that issue.
Now, that may be changing. >> Well, I've seen in I've seen in Canada, well, I talked to a lot of conservative politicians in Canada and a fair number in the US, although I think the proclivity for this is much more market in Canada because it's more left-leaning. Um, 10 years ago, the typical conservative was terrified in Canada of saying anything that's smacked of social conservatism. And there was a very specific reason for that. And the reason was if any one of them came out publicly and said anything socially conservative, then the woke psychopathic mob would take them out on social media like as an individual, right? They'd be targeted and destroyed. And that was very effective. and the conservatives who are also very guiltrone. Like that's the other thing too is that the left has this radicals have this tremendous advantage because especially the really psychopathic ones because conservatives feel guilt but radical leftist psychopaths feel none and they can use guilt as a weapon and conservatives are very sensitive to that. So you get that combination of clear threat because it is no fun to be mobbed. It's really really hard on people. that drives them to not only to distraction but often to suicide. You lose your job, you lose your friends, you lose your reputation. No one has enough courage to stand up beside you. The radicals had the conservatives cowed completely. And so, and affirmative action is a real touchstone for that because to even question it, well, it's changed to some degree now, not that much, but to even question it meant your the probability that you could be accused of being a racist was like super high. It's going to happen instantly. >> Right?
But I think this is where you have what political scientists would call an Overton window of acceptable debate, right? And if you're outside that window, you can be cancelled or but you can be attacked by the press. But what we've actually seen in Europe and in the US is you take an issue like immigration that was a taboo in many European societies that's no longer a taboo. So Sweden for example, you could not the the sort of establishment conservative party tried to one of the ministers tried to raise levels of immigration as an issue in Sweden in 2014. He was attacked in the media as a racist. Okay, he's shut down. But then what that means is the next year the Sweden Democrats swoop in on 12 and a half and of course they've reached 25%. US Trump was the only candidate of 17 primary candidates in 2015-16 to make the border a signature issue. He was willing to go there. Now once you break the taboo all of a sudden as in Sweden now all the parties are talking about immigration and the taboo is it's not gone entirely but the Overton window is open quite a bit. And so in Canada likewise we're going to need that. Now we've seen it a bit on the gender issue. Premier Higs in New Brunswick. We've seen Scott Mo in Saskatchewan. That's the beginning of an opening up of a convers. You need a brave politician like Higs to break the ice. The next thing that we need to see from a Canadian politician is to break the ice on this hoax of the mass graves. that has to somebody has to sort of say the emperor's new clothes on this thing because there is no evidence of this and it underpins an entire garment rending attack on national history on the founders of Canada etc. Now who is going to take who's going to throw the first stone in that I don't know but it has to happen and I think I I would argue that in fact the population will follow you cuz for example in the surveys I've done by two to one Canadians do not want Sir John A. McDonald statues removed. They support the idea. Yes, he was a creature of his time. No, this idea that that the residential schools are genocide, etc. I mean, this I just think somebody needs to go after that.
>> Have you had a chance to talk to PR Polyv, the new leader of the Conservative Party in Canada?
>> I haven't. Um, I'm a little concerned. I mean, I I certainly think obviously that Trudeau was was a disaster for all the issues we're talking about. So, uh, but I'm worried that Polyf has only largely talked about economics and only reluctantly about any cultural issues. Now, I get it. He's well ahead in the polls. Why endanger that? Prior priorities to get there is some of that.
>> Yeah.
>> Mhm. My sense is though, you know, my my sense is in Canada that the Conservatives are a lot different lot than they were 15 years ago. Like Daniel Smith has a spine, Scott Mo has a spine, Higs has a spine, so does Polyv there. Polyv isn't pushing the cultural issues at the moment. And I think it's partly because, and I think this is actually wisdom to some degree, if your opponent is busy slaughtering himself, you might as well just stand and watch. Well, seriously, there's not, you know, there's no sense causing a tremendous amount of trouble while that's occurring. Uh, but the Conservatives are much less intimidated in Canada than they were 15 years ago. Like a lot. And they'll certainly make an issue of the sorts of things that we've been discussing in a way that wouldn't have been conceivable in say 2010. I think that's right. I Yeah. Um, I I I think that it's al but I do think it's important for the grassroots to to some degree hold Polyv to account when he's in office. If, for example, he backtracks on defunding the CBC, if he doesn't do anything on say anything on immigration, on culture wars, I think that, you know, and my worry I having seen it in Britain where the conservative government came in with the support of Brexit voters and essentially did not deliver hoping that that the voters wouldn't notice. So I that's my worry, but I don't know is the honest answer. I don't know him or his cabinet.
[Music]