← The Rubin Report
The Rubin Report
JK Rowling's Perfect Reaction After Winning a Major Battle Against the 'Woke'
01:12:29
Loading summary
Transcript130 lines
- [00:00]
James Lindsay
Whenever I need to send roses that are guaranteed to make someone's day, the only place I trust is 1-800-flowers.com with 1-800-flowers. My friends and family always receive stunning, high quality bouquets that they absolutely love. Right now, when you buy a dozen multicolored roses, 1-800-flowers will double your bouquet to two dozen roses. To claim this special double roses offer, go to 1-800-flowers.com Spotify. That's 1-800-flowers. Com Spotify.
- [00:38]
Dave Rubin
All right, people, just like the logo says. This is the Rubin Report. I'm Dave Rubin and it's time for another Friday roundtable extravaganza. This is an all star episode. I'm calling it right now. We've got Rubin Report veterans, the host of the Winston Marshall Show, Winston Marshall, as well as the founder of New Discourses, James Lindsay. Winston James, I've called this an all star show. That's a lot of pressure on a Friday. Do you think you're up to it?
- [01:06]
James Lindsay
I was born ready, Dave.
- [01:10]
Dave Rubin
That wasn't an all star start. Wasn't an all star start, guys.
- [01:14]
James Lindsay
Amateur. Amateur hour.
- [01:17]
Dave Rubin
Well, we'll start this way. We're going to catch up on a bunch of the sort of, I guess, cultural craziness. We're going to bounce across the pond to your country, Winston. Although you are in our country at the moment, you are a Brit at heart and by birth. We're going some stuff coming out of the uk. We're going to talk about what has happened to the good old libs, which I think we kind of are or were or at least were around a lot. We'll talk a little bit about Trump and Harvard. And then they sent Gayle King to space and she came back and she's very, very excited about it. But let's start across the pond because in the UK they have decided officially it is law now that boys have penises and girls have vaginas. Very exciting. This from the BBC. UK Supreme Court rules legal definition of a is based on biological sex. Judges say the concept of sex is binary, while cautioning that the landmark ruling should not be seen as a victory of one side over another. Transgender people will still have legal protection from discrimination, the court adds. The Scottish government had argued that transgender people with a gender recognition certificate, GRC, are entitled to sex based protections, while 4Women Scotland argued they only apply to people who are born female. For women, Scotland says it's grateful for the decision after a long road of legal battles. While charity Scottish Trans urges people not to panic. The Scottish government says it acted in good faith and will work with Westminster to understand the full implications of the ruling. Winston, I have to start with you. This is a good day for your country. Are you happy with this decision? Do you agree with this decision? And what type of genitals do you have?
- [02:59]
Winston Marshall
Yeah, Dave, I should correct an earlier point. I am actually back home in Britain and it is indeed a glorious day here on Turf Island. I should just explain, anyone who heard you read that just there might be a little bit confused. I'll explain what the contention is. In 2004, there was the Gender Recognition act, which meant that anyone going through certain protocol could apply and get a gender recognition certificate, I. E. They could identify officially and legally as the gender not in line with their biological sex. This got confusing in 2010 when the Equality act was passed, which said that there was equal protection under the law dependent on, amongst other things, sex. But that 2010 Equality act did not state whether or not it was biological sex or other. So a group, as you mentioned, four women, Scotland, who are backed, I should say, by J.K. rowling. The great J.K. rowling, of course, needs no introduction. They have been fighting this battle first in the Scottish courts and it's gone all the way to the top court, the Supreme Court, where the judges unanimously voted that it, the Equality act should be biological sex. It should be interpreted as biological sex. Now, having said that, the Gender Recognition act and gender recognition certificates are still available, so you can, if you want, still apply for a change of gender. Although now we're defining gender and sex differently. So that's the big thing that's happened and it's been a great day for the gender critical women and activists. And I should say it means a lot in real terms. It means that women's spaces are protected. It means that in public life or in the public sector, women, when it comes to quotas, when it comes to various things, will not include men who identify as women. And hopefully it will encourage a culture in the private sector also differentiating between biological sex and gender. So I. That's just to clear it up, what's going on.
- [05:26]
Dave Rubin
I appreciate the clarification. I also feel I owe you an apology because I've been to your place in New York, that was obviously not it. And Connor, can you go to the wide shot on Winston for a moment? That is very obviously a British study that you are in right now. It's a British chair. The coloring is British, the lighting is British. It's very, very British.
- [05:44]
Winston Marshall
Teal colored paint and a map of The Isle of Man behind me. Yes.
- [05:47]
Dave Rubin
Is very much tea and crumpets just out of the shot right there. You did mention J.K. rowling, of course, creator of Harry Potter, and she's been fighting the gender crazy people for a long time. She saw this ruling and she wrote this. I love it when a plan comes together. Supri. Hashtag Supreme Court, hashtag women's rights. And there she is, smoking a cigar, drinking a cocktail, and she has gotten just so much hate because of standing up for women. It's crazy. James, whether you want to take this from the British angle or not, I mean, you've been fighting against this stuff forever. You've been at the forefront of explaining where it's come from and everything else. Do you. Do you view this as kind of a seminal moment in the pushback against all the gender nonsense?
- [06:31]
James Lindsay
Yeah, it's an important moment. I do appreciate also, which I think you will do with me as well, Dave, that J.K. rowling made an A team reference there. That is a. That is the A team she's referencing. Not all the zoomers are going to quite get that. They don't know about the black van. And they don't. They're not getting on. No playing Hannibal. So that is fantastic. This is important. I mean, I was listening to everything that Winston just said very seriously and all the thing. The thing that you read and trying to be serious, and I just kind of laugh the whole time. It's all just so absurd. And so this, I think, is a seminal moment in the. The world starting to recognize that this has been absurd. I mean, just imagine we've got J.K. rowling now. We've got gender recognition certificates. It could be Harry Potter. And the gender recognition certificate.
- [07:16]
Dave Rubin
It's just.
- [07:18]
James Lindsay
Absolutely.
- [07:20]
Dave Rubin
And the gender recognition certificates.
- [07:24]
James Lindsay
I have a certificate. I have a certificate. I mean, it's so. For me, I mean, we could talk about as much of the philosophy or the details of the legal battles or whatever, but this is a major court making a major step that's finally saying, wait a minute, reality exists again. Let's put our feet back on Earth. And it makes it almost. You know, it's going to. It's going to open the door to give us the permission to start laughing at how absurd this has always been. And I do think it's a seminal moment in changing hearts and minds on the issue.
- [07:55]
Dave Rubin
Speaking. Speaking of absurd, we're going to get back to genitals in just a second. But since we're talking about J.K. rowling, did you she has gotten so much crap because of taking the position that women are women and men are men, but you should still individually respect people that. They've basically kicked her out of Harry Potter world. I'm pretty sure she's not allowed to go to Universal Studios anymore. But look at this. And of course, that's the original Severus Snape, played by Alan Rickman. They're redoing it and he's going to be that guy. Winston, you're British. Come on, do something with this. It's just another extension of this nonsense. He was described as like a tall, thin guy with a long nose in the book. And it's just like, why do they just keep doing this? Just create a new character.
- [08:41]
Winston Marshall
I definitely get annoyed when historical characters get changed and, you know, turned into all sorts of opposite races intentionally. And they wouldn't do that. For example, you wouldn't, of course, have Nelson Mandela portrayed by Brad Pitt. I think when it comes to something like this, yeah, it would go against the description in the book and. But, you know, it's not personally something I'm going to lose hair over or sleep over, but I just want to say something about J.K. rowling. She. She's really put her, as you say, her neck on the line, but it's been a tremendous cost and she's been utterly villainized in this country. And I also note that she's a woman of the left, as far as I understand it. She's been a labor supporter for much of her career, but she is one of the most generous women this country has ever produced. Not only does she quite literally pay, she must have paid into the billions in taxes. So she's basically supporting the economy, but on top of that, she's donated huge sums. She must be, if not the biggest philanthropist in the country, one of them, and possibly the biggest female philanthropist in the country. So her generosity has seen no bounds. And the way she's been villainized and continues to be villainized even today by the gender critical activists that we see online is really. It's disgraceful, frankly. And so this is a really special day for her. And you'll remember her famous letter she wrote. And she's been a shield for women who have spoken out on this and had been villainized. Every time any woman, whether they're in pop music, whether they're in private sector, the public sector, nurses, whoever they are, and they get in trouble for expressing fact about biology, she comes to defend them. And I'd also say, just to James's point, You know, you're right. This is absolutely ridiculous. It's like saying, telling us now in 10 years time they'll go to the Supreme Court to rule that one plus one does indeed equal. That's actually how absurd it is that we couldn't have fathomed this even five, maybe 10 years ago. It's absolutely ludicrous. But I would say the work is not finished. I think the Gender Recognition act, where you can very easily, I might add, obtain a certificate saying you are of the opposite gender, amongst other things. One of the problems it imposes, I think, is the culture that you can actually be change your gender. I don't know that you think that's true. I don't think there's anything such thing as gender. I think there is just biological sex. And the big problem is because the truth is that there's something called gender dysphoria. Now to be fair to the gender gender critical act, and I'd like to know what's going on in America on this subject. But it does recognize gender dysphoria as an issue. But if we can say, yes, there is such thing as gender dysphoria, but that doesn't mean you can change your sex, that sentence hasn't really been said explicitly. We haven't quite got there. I'd say there's some work to do.
- [11:45]
Dave Rubin
So James, to that point, maybe that's the easiest way to explain it. But I have a feeling you're going to tell me that they would never accept that, that you would just say, okay, there's biological differences and then you can just express your gender identity however the hell you want. But it doesn't change, it doesn't change the scientific reality. But they won't go for that, right? I mean that's what you've been talking about for years.
- [12:04]
James Lindsay
Yeah, that's right. And in particular they're not going to go for the idea that, you know, they already have. We all, everybody, whether you wanted to or not, and say 19 you2 all had the freedom to express your so called gender identity or gender stereotypes or whatever, however you wanted to. You could be a guy with long hair. Many people in the 1970s did. You could do. You could present as feminine, you could.
- [12:27]
Dave Rubin
Present as more masc, David Bowie, Mick Jagger, anyone.
- [12:30]
James Lindsay
The freedom was all there to it. What wasn't there was the state backing up the ability to force people to acknowledge it. And so this will not be satisfactory for them. They aren't actually concerned as much as they talk about freedoms and this and that. And liberty. They're not actually. Or liberation is the word they use. They're not actually concerned with that. They are subscribed to a view of the world. And here's where we'll get deep for a second. Called social constructivism. Everybody's heard this. Gender is a social construct. That's kind of where people like you and I, Dave, kind of cut our teeth against this madness 10 years ago. Gender is a social construct. They believe in social constructivism, which means that the society constructs what is true and what is false. And so what society endorses and reifies through law is what actually matters. So this will absolutely be unacceptable to them. This. They will actually, before long, I'm pretty sure somebody will come out and call this a genocide because it's. Their entire social constructivist world has now had its knees cut out from underneath it and this will be a huge problem for them. But I agree with Winston that this is a starting place. But in fact, the fact that you. That there is still a Gender Recognition act, the name just cracks me up. It's so formal and like sterile and gender.
- [13:53]
Dave Rubin
It's like. It's like gender affirming care. It's the same kind of dystopian language. But James, let me jump in for a sec because this is a perfect segue, which is that as this thing kind of corrects itself, it also goes backwards at the exact same time. Winston, here's your Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, and he's a little confused over who has a cervix.
- [14:11]
Winston Marshall
It transphobic to say only women have a cervix? Well, it is something that shouldn't be said. It is not right. But Andrew, I don't think Rosie Duffield.
- [14:24]
Dave Rubin
Should not have said that.
- [14:24]
Winston Marshall
Can you explain to people watching why.
- [14:26]
Dave Rubin
She should not have said that?
- [14:28]
Winston Marshall
Andrew, I don't think that we can just go through various things that people said. Rosie Duffield, I spoke to Rosie earlier this week and told. Told her that conference was a safe place for her to come and it is a safe place for her.
- [14:42]
Dave Rubin
There's something particularly perverse about that, I think, Winston, because he said it's something that shouldn't be said. He didn't say women. He didn't say men don't have cervixes. He said it's something that shouldn't be said. Like that is as dystopian as it gets.
- [14:59]
Winston Marshall
I agree. And he's not the only one in the Labour Party to express such opinions more. Others have been more explicit to say women can have penises. Including our Foreign Minister, David Lamit, I would say, with Sir Keir Starmer, our Prime Minister, in that video. And there's been other ones similar like this. I think he's actually said worse things than that. And I would also note that since then, he's come back towards the rational. But in that moment, one of two things. Either he's lying and he knows that a man can't be a woman, or he's not lying and he actually is. If he's not lying, he's either confused about what it is.
- [15:40]
Dave Rubin
Yeah.
- [15:40]
Winston Marshall
And if that's the case, it shouldn't be running the country. You can't deal with the basic concept of male and female, and the idea of the complexities of running a nation seem just absurd. But it's also the case that if he. If he is lying, and either because he's an ideologue or otherwise, he, again, is not someone should be trusted running a country.
- [16:04]
Dave Rubin
Is that the fundamental point with all of the woke stuff, James? Like, if you basically can't affirmatively say that men don't have cervixes, like, how the hell are you supposed to negotiate a peace deal or have sound economic policy or quite literally anything else?
- [16:20]
James Lindsay
I mean, I would agree that that's a concern, but it's like you said, this is a perfect pivot, you said, because it highlights that idea of social constructivism. And then his weasely language, Starmer's Weasley language, made that abundantly clear. He didn't acknowledge what is or is not about the world. He said what should and shouldn't be said. Because the social constructivist view is that which we. The. What reality actually is is what we are willing to acknowledge and not acknowledge. So reality is determined by our perceptions, which are contoured by what we believe should and shouldn't, or enforce should and shouldn't be recognized, said or spoken about or written about. And so it's kind of way deeper than. I mean, I agree with Winston. If you're. If you're struggling with male and female, the complexities of the country are maybe out of your grasp. However, he's not struggling with male and female. The. He's actually adopted another. I mean, he could just be a politician lying, but he's expressing the views of a worldview, a complete worldview that does not allow you to negotiate with reality. It only allows you to negotiate with constructions and political activity. So it's. It's far more dangerous than somebody who literally just can't figure out, you know, like, you said that boys have a penis and girls have a vagina.
- [17:40]
Dave Rubin
Yeah, I think that's a great point here. Now, here in America, we've got a Secretary of Education who knows what's what.
- [17:48]
Gayle King
Madam Secretary, I do want to put up Title 9 because it seems like that's the foundation of your argument here. Just as a reminder for anyone I know, my own mother was a massive beneficiary of Title ix. And I'm lucky to be young enough that that had been settled by the time I went to school. It says, no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. So can you explain why you think transgender athletes amounts to sex discrimination under this title?
- [18:26]
Unnamed Speaker
I think there are two sexes. There's male and female. And so transgender doesn't have a play in this. You're born a boy, you're a boy, you're born a girl, you're a girl. And even with puberty blocking hormones, etcetera, Males are still stronger. Their structure is different. They can perform very differently in competition. And we have to. We have to respect and understand that and give women the rights that they have under this Title nine.
- [18:55]
Dave Rubin
Now, Winston, before I have you chime in, I was thinking, I was watching that and I was going, well, how did she become so clear on this issue? How is it possible she knows that men and women are different? And then we found this video, and I think this is pretty much when she figured it out.
- [19:21]
James Lindsay
Wait, which one of those two is the woman?
- [19:26]
Dave Rubin
You know, when you get pile drive by a 350 pound man, you suddenly go, my genitals do match.
- [19:32]
James Lindsay
I love it.
- [19:33]
Winston Marshall
I love that America has just turned into 90s WWF attitude. Like, that's reality now. It's fantastic.
- [19:40]
Dave Rubin
James, do you have anything to add or should we move on?
- [19:44]
James Lindsay
We maybe should just move on. I mean, she had a point, right? So Linda McMahon had a point?
- [19:49]
Dave Rubin
Yeah, I guess. Just bravo, Linda McMahon. You know the difference between boys and girls. Pretty good. All right, let's talk about Hillsdale College for a minute. And then more on the other side. Hillsdale College is offering 40 free online courses, and they're some of the best out there. You can dive deep into the Constitution, explore the rise and fall of the Roman Republic, or study the book of Genesis, all at no cost. But if you take just one, I recommend Marxism, socialism, and Communism. This brand new course features six powerful episodes where Hillsdale professors unpack Marx's life, his writings, and the horrors of communism in the Soviet Union and China. You'll also see how Marxist ideas are showing up in American politics today. Start Marxism, socialism, and Communism today for free at Hillsdale. Edu Dave. That's Hillsdale. Eduardo. Edu Dave and yes, it's completely free. Okay, so the other big thing that happened over the last couple weeks, it wasn't revealed until earlier this week, but it happened actually about two weeks ago, was that Bill Maher, a man that we all know, the man who's been, I would say, the standard bearer for American classical liberalism for the last three decades, he met with Donald Trump, a man who he's been making fun of, and Trump's been making fun of him for decades at this point. Bill Maher. And that's my buddy Chuck LaBella, who does some work with Bill. Obviously, that's Trump and Dana White from the ufc. Winston, what was your take on just seeing people who seemingly are supposed to hate each other or who have been at odds forever breaking bread?
- [21:20]
Winston Marshall
It feels like we're back to normal. I mean, I feel like the last 10, 15 years, where you're not allowed to talk to people you disagree with has always been crazy. That's not the world I was brought up in before then. And for me, this is a step in the right direction, and we should be able to talk to people with completely different worldviews, which is, I know this is why you have people on your show and you go on to other shows with people that disagree with you, and you should be able to meet these people. That's normal. What's happened over the last 10 years is not.
- [21:51]
Dave Rubin
Yeah, James, that's pretty much your life actually, for the last 10 years. You went from talk. Well, I don't want to say only talking to liberals, but you basically, for the last 10 years, have been welcomed into conservative circles, into religious circles, a group of people generally, who you would think you'd be at odds with. And they've shown you a lot of love and warmth and everything else. So this must be rather heartwarming for you, I suppose.
- [22:17]
James Lindsay
Yeah, it's charming. I'm confused. Given kind of broader context in the world right now, like, so, you know, Bill Maher says that he met with Trump. We see the pictures, we know he met with Trump, and he's got this kind of different opinion of the guy because he got, you know, firsthand experience. But just the other day on Joe Rogan, we learned that having firsthand experience of a thing is not what you're supposed to have. And I had the firsthand experience of, you know, being well welcomed by Christians and conservatives, but then I'm. Maybe I should have just watched it on YouTube. I don't. I don't know what's going on in the world anymore, or. Except that I do, which is that I'm starting to get afraid that the thing that Winston just said, which is this weird division thing, is not normal. Like, that you don't talk to people that you disagree with. You know, that that's not normal. We should be talking with people. We should be getting to know people. We should actually be humanizing each other. Is. Is threatening to be lost in yet another way. So, you know, I'm a little bit concerned about some of these things, so I'm a little bit confused, but. No, this is good. I would like to see. I've noticed and heard so many different people that have had the opportunity to meet President Trump come away completely flabbergasted that he exactly like Bill Maher said, is nothing like what the media portray him to be. And the Trump derangement syndrome, media psyops is probably, you know, one of the top five kind of most insane psychological operations we've seen in our lifetimes, maybe that's ever taken place. Covid, of course, is up there, too. And it's nice to see that we're now at the point where the breakthrough against that is happening and people are sitting down and starting to talk to one another and actually find out for themselves.
- [23:53]
Dave Rubin
Yeah. And by the way, as my audience knows, I literally sat in the chair at Club Random with Bill about three years ago and said I changed with Trump the day that I met him. Thus he then, now, three years later, says the exact same thing at Winston, you sat in that. Well, you were actually in a. Technically, you were in a different chair, same studio, but you sat down with Bill about a week ago, and here you guys are talking about classical liberalism and sort of the roots of it. And which way do we go, people?
- [24:21]
Unnamed Speaker
You get a certain amount of cult followers for anything, and then the true believers never die. I mean, a lot of people would say right now the Democratic Party is still in that mode, which is going to render them possibly an irrelevant party if they don't change.
- [24:38]
Winston Marshall
What would you like to see from the Democrats, like, going forward?
- [24:41]
Unnamed Speaker
Well, much more centrism, Much more get rid of the woke baggage. You know, old school liberal is what I usually describe myself as, but that's very often the opposite of woke. Woke would like people to believe that there's some sort of an extension of liberalism, but they're not. They're usually something that's quite opposite. Liberalism was we should have a colorblind society and not see race at all. That's not what the woke believe. Yeah, I say they're the opposite. Let's make. Put race at the front of everything.
- [25:15]
Winston Marshall
Yep, absolutely. Oppressor and oppressed. Sacred. Make a sacred. The oppressed.
- [25:20]
Dave Rubin
So, Winston, I know everyone watching this gets that woke is the opposite of liberalism. Okay, fine. Now, my position has been for a while that the. Those liberals, those moderate classical liberals, whatever you want to call them, old school liberals, they should be on the more moderate wing of the Republican Party. That makes sense. That's Tulsi, that's Bobby, et cetera, et cetera. What Bill is still sort of saying, although you guys tape that before or after he met with Trump?
- [25:44]
Winston Marshall
After.
- [25:44]
Dave Rubin
After he met with Trump. So he hasn't said he's supporting Trump. He's just kind of in the ballpark, let's say. I think his position still would be, oh, the liberals. I mean, he basically said it there. The liberals should still be trying to retake the Democrat party from the crazies. Do you have a particular opinion on that?
- [26:03]
Winston Marshall
Just to be clear, he's very much not supporting Trump. He. He told me, and I think he also made it expressly clear in his monologue on Real Time that he too, Trump's face expressed his concerns. His concerns about the deportations, his concerns about free speech under the Trump regime. He's very much not a supporter of Trump 2.0, let alone Trump 1.0. He was right, absolutely, about two things. Not only what you said there about liberalism and woke being opposites, but he's also right about the cult of wokeism. And this actually just pertains to what we were previously discussing. It was the sagacious Thomas Jefferson who said, if everyone thinks the same, no one is thinking. And that also goes to the point that we should be speaking. If we are thinking all the same, we're basically in a cult. I think that he would. I would. I don't think. I mean, where the Democrats are right now seems a long way from sanity. But I don't think it's out the question that some of the liberals like you say, who are at the moment supporting Trump might move back to the Democrat Party. I think sensible people like Tulsi, like rfk, liberals are at the moment, let's put it this way, liberals are now aligning with the Trumps, with Trump because the Democrats and the progressives are not liberal in any way, sense or shape. This is actually what Frederick Hyatt described in his essay why I'm Not a Conservative. And he describes we have the famous horseshoe concept of the difference between left and right wing. But he says you have a line between conservatives and progressives and the liberals will like, will swing with each whichever way is the least totalitarian and happens to be aligning with liberalism. When I spoke to Bill, we both reminisced about how in the 90s it was Tipper Gore, who although was the wife of Al Gore, of course a Democrat, it was a conservative movement to censor rappers. And it could be the case that in 10 years time the conservatives swing too far that way. In politics things can change quicker than you, than you might remember.
- [28:33]
Dave Rubin
Yeah, look, it was the conservatives when I was a kid, it was the conservative Republicans going after Mortal Kombat, literally going after video games. So James, do you think that this thing, whether Bill is fully part of it or not, but this thing that somewhat, I would say represents the three of us, do you think it can hold within the MAGA movement? And we'll get to what you referenced by the way you referenced something on Rogan. We'll get to that at the end of the show also, which is, I would say, ancillarily connected to this.
- [28:57]
James Lindsay
Yeah, it's under threat for sure, but I think that it's time for a resurgence. I think about this question actually really deeply and I don't know, I, I kind of think the word liberal is like completely dead. It's been abused by, by Marxists and progressives co opting it and claiming it for themselves and misusing it. It's been abused by conservative commentators like Rush Limbaugh, for example, with a huge microphone, big famous golden microphone, who did not bother to distinguish between leftists and liberals whatsoever. And I think it's just kind of lost. I think nobody can. It's not that they don't understand the word, it's that they can. There's too many, there's too much like smoke in the air. Nobody can understand the word anymore. But there are certain principles, I think that need to be revitalized. We need to be asking ourselves what is it about individual rights? What is it about securing, you know, whether it's a right to do process, which is in the news right now, whether it's a right to, you know, to own and use your own property as you will, whether it's your rights, inalienable rights to life Liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which is also the use of your property. We've really got to look at what that that represents. Because one of the big fracture lines in MAGA right now, if you were to ask me or in the broader conservative movement, is does it want to be a liberty movement or does it want to be a virtue, like a compelled virtue movement, where there are going to be authorities and powers who tell you what the correct morals and values are because they believe society's gone so degenerate that they can't govern themselves and therefore have to be governed in those personal domains. And that's the, the question you asked me, Dave, is an open question. It's not clear to me that the liberty movement is going to come out on top. But if we don't have people, including Bill Maher and people such as ourselves and others, speaking up and articulating the case for whether it's, you know, common sense, whether it's the principle of universalism, whether it's the principle of Christians, call it imago dei, but it's the, in essence, we are all equal in the creation of our Creator. If we don't start advocating for these principles, then we have a major problem coming on our hands because there is a concerted effort to replace that with enforced virtue, which is what the WOKE did. And it's what the, if you want to call them woke, right, or if you just want to call them the radical right or the alt right or the Christian nationalist right, whatever you want to call them, they want to enforce morality too. And it's an invitation to the same kinds of problems. And it's a real threat right now.
- [31:26]
Dave Rubin
Yeah, and that actually perfectly illustrates the point you were making, Winston, that Hayek made that so the liberals could actually bounce back and forth in terms of where they vote, because authoritarianism can come from either side. Let's talk about Lean for a minute and then we'll get to some of the things that Trump is doing and we'll discuss are they liberal or not? Are you stuck in the yo yo dieting cycle? You lose weight, gain it all back, back, plus a few extra pounds, then do it all over again. It's not just frustrating, it's dangerous. Studies show that repeated weight fluctuations can increase your risk of heart attack, stroke, type 2 diabetes and other serious health problems. That's why doctors created Lean, a supplement designed to help you lose weight and keep it off. Unlike injections, Lean is a natural science backed formula that requires no prescription. It works by supporting healthy blood sugar levels, controlling appetite and burning fat by converting it into energy. If you're tired of losing weight just to gain it right back and you're ready to lose weight at a healthy, sustainable pace, Lean was made for you. Get 20% off your first order with code Reuben20@takelean.com that's Ruben, 20@takelean.com Start your journey today. All right, so of course, one of the big fights that Trump has picked is with Harvard. And Harvard somehow has become, I would say, ground zero or the epicenter for much of the woke lunacy. Here's White House spokeswoman Caroline Levitt on Trump cutting a cool 2 bill in federal funding from Harvard.
- [32:46]
Unnamed Speaker
The president at that time made it clear to the American public he was not going to tolerate illegal harassment and anti Semitism taking place and violations of federal law. So the president made it clear to Harvard, follow federal law, no longer. Break Title 6, which was passed by Congress to ensure no student can be discriminated against on the basis of race and you will receive federal funding. Unfortunately, Harvard has not taken the president, the administration's demands seriously. All the president is asking, don't break federal law and then you can have your federal funding. I think the president is also begging a good question. More than $2 billion out the door to Harvard when they have a more than $50 billion endowment. Why are the American taxpayers subsidizing a university that has billions of dollars in the bank already? And we certainly should should not be funding a place where such grave anti Semitism exists.
- [33:38]
Dave Rubin
So, Winston, I would take this as an example of Donald Trump defending liberalism. When you sat across from Bill in that clip we showed a moment ago, he said liberals used to believe in a colorblind society. Harvard has chosen to believe in a discriminatory society where if you are white or Asian or of course Jewish, you are going to be discriminated against in admissions and you are going to be elevated if you are black or brown or whatever they want to call it. So this is Trump defending liberalism, isn't it?
- [34:08]
Winston Marshall
Well, it's more explicitly about the problem of anti Semitism. You are right, though. There's various in the letter that Trump sent, open letters sent to Harvard, there is talk about DEI hiring that must end. Of course, I think it was 2024, was the, maybe it was 2023, the Supreme Court case regarding the Asians being discriminated against at Harvard. So they've had a problem with various minorities, not just Jews, although it's clearly high achieving minorities in this case. And I would say yes, those are liberal principles. And not only that, Trump invokes Title 6 of the Civil Rights Act. So this is very much old school Democrat that he did the same thing with Colombia, the same principles when he was discussing their funding, where I think it gets a little bit tricky. And maybe where I would find the niggle in the idea that this is entirely liberal is that he asks in his letter that there be viewpoint diversity. Now, the problem with that is how exactly do you have quotas on viewpoint diversity and on what issues do do you not have viewpoint diversity? For example, just because one would teach Nazi history one doesn't mean we have to have a pro Nazi and an anti Nazi. I would hope everyone would be anti Nazi. So at what point do you no longer need viewpoint diversity? And so actually I'm not sure and James would be better on this than me when it pertains to education. I'm not sure exactly to, to what level you can be totally liberal when you, when, when, when in enforcing what should be taught and who should teach it.
- [36:09]
Dave Rubin
Well, all right, so James, that's a perfect question for you because in essence what he's asking is there has to, in some way, there has to be some level of gatekeeping. If an institution is going to exist, an institution has to say, these are the parameters in which we exist within. So what do you think the proper. If they're going to be completely colorblind as far as admissions, which is, I think, what we all want, then how do you deal with what Winston's talking about there?
- [36:32]
James Lindsay
Yeah, sure. And of course the, the, the radicals will always couch what they're doing. And I think that's what Obama said in response to this in terms of academic freedom somehow. So it is an important, it is kind of the important question. And it's to the point of gatekeeping. I've taken a little bit, I've become a little bit fond of saying that if you understand why you don't eat dog crap, you understand gatekeeping and diet matters. You don't want to let dog. You know, it could be, you know, a pro Nazi or a pro flat earth or whatever department at Harvard, it could be a plate full of dog crap. You don't want to put bad things in. So we do actually have to do some gatekeeping at a, the point of liberal education, as we kind of generally understand it isn't, however, this sort of, you know, open the gates. Anything goes. Anything, you know, is necessarily on the table. The liberal. This goes back to Jonathan Rauch's book Kindly Inquisitors which I strongly recommend people read, the liberal principle for pursuing knowledge is that there, you know, there's no final answers, there's no special authority, so every question has to be able to be challenged, but that there are also methodologies by which those challenges are made. And so we know that things like Flat Earth don't come from a rigorous methodology. We know that, that even with more complicated moral issues, like whether or not the Nazis were, were bad or all bad or evil or something like that, is because, you know, their plan was explicitly in Mein Kampf to do a genocide, which they then enacted, and to build an empire, which they attempted to enact and were stopped by warfare. That we know that certain things are not. I mean, we're welcome to say that not all cultures are equal, so we don't have to fall into cultural or epistemic relativism just because we want to allow viewpoint diversity. It is a question, though, methodologically is how you discern that in the sciences. Methodologically is how you discern that really theologically. But you see a lot of fracturing in churches that way. And it should also be in kind of more humanities oriented fields like history and sociology and so on.
- [38:48]
Dave Rubin
So you mentioned Barack Obama, and I want to read his tweet in response to what Trump did, because this was just perfect Obama and I so regret voting for this man twice. Harvard has set an example for other higher ed institutions, rejecting an unlawful and ham handed attempt to stifle academic freedom while taking concrete steps to make sure all students at Harvard can benefit from an environment of intellectual inquiry, rigorous debate and mutual respect. Let's hope other institutions will follow suit. I mean, that is a rather extraordinary statement. Not only because they have been discriminating against whites and Asians and Jews, obviously, but they've also made it an incredibly hostile atmosphere for certain students. And I should note, I will even read it to you. The 1964 Civil Rights act, which obviously Obama is not a fan of. The Civil Rights act of 1964, specifically, Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. It also created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to enforce these protections. And Winston, you pointed out that a year or two ago, the Supreme Court decided the exact same thing as it pertained to college admissions. So Barack Obama seems to be completely fine with discriminating against, let's just say, Asians, if nobody else.
- [40:04]
Winston Marshall
Well, I'd also might add it seems like he can't read. I mean, if he'd read the letter that Trump published, it specifically says that nothing should go against First Amendment rights. So they have Trump is. And the Trump administration being absolutely clear that it cannot, that there will be freedom of inquiry there. Now, Obama's away with the fairies on this one, but I would like to give a possible critique which I think might be a bit more fair. Or maybe you gentlemen will have a riposte for me. You can explain this to me. But it seems to me that why absolutely obvious that Harvard aren't owed a $2 billion federal funds. Why should working Americans pay for elite a bunch of kids for an education? Now, I would say that there is some work done at Harvard, exceptional scientific explorations of that sort of genre of work that does actually benefit all of America. And there's actual academic inquiry that that a society needs. But Harvard has a $50 billion endowment already. So the question of why taxpayers should should pay even more. I think it absolutely Trump is in his right to say, if you don't sort out this racism. We saw videos of kids getting beaten at Harvard. You'll remember the video that the Jewish kids had to lock themselves into a library to protect themselves after October 7th. That was all happening at Harvard University. And we've seen similar things across the country. Columbia University might have been just as bad. The two are in the. The running for the worst anti Semitism we've seen, we saw in America at the student level. But where Trump's going at a new level now is he's saying that Harvard will no longer be IRS tax exempt. Now, I would say that that goes a bit beyond, I think just federal funding, because that's not, that's not the irs. Them being tax exempt is completely separate from the federal tax they received. Seems like a different portion or different. I'm not sure. It seems like a different category of issue. I wonder what your opinions as Americans was on that.
- [42:31]
Dave Rubin
Well, it's also worth noting that unless Barack Obama is taking sort of the most extreme libertarian position, which is that the 64 Civil Rights act shouldn't have been signed and you should be allowed to discriminate, which, by the way, I think you can make an intellectually honest argument for, you want to open up a business, a coffee shop, and say no, black people can come, okay, fine, we'll see how your coffee shop does. Like, I think there's an actual argument for that. I'm not even taking that argument, but I think you could make it. But I'm fairly certain, James, that that's not the argument that Barack Obama is actually trying to make.
- [43:00]
James Lindsay
It's not. He's making a communist argument. And he actually signals the communist argument with a very subtle little flash, which is the word all. He wants it to be an environment where all students can flourish. That base, that the way, the way communists use the word all in that context is in the equity base. And that what it does is it assumes that under the current situation or current system, not all students are able to get equal protection. Therefore, you have to jimmy the system so that all students are acknowledged. You'll see that language everywhere. It's very subtle, but he's acknowledging that. So he doesn't want that. He does not want the Civil Rights act of 1964 undone because he wants to maintain the Civil Rights act of 1991, which follows the court decision in 1971. Although this is Universities of Bakke. No, sorry, Bakke versus Board of Regents is, is the one that the previous case overturned. This is Griggs versus Duke Power, which set the basis for the equity programs. So right now in the United States, there's actually a legal challenge floating out there. The civil rights laws are based off of the 14th Amendment and its equal protection clause. And I don't know to Winston's question whether or not that applies to nonprofit status, but if it does, then Trump is within his rights. And if it doesn't, then he may not be in challenging their nonprofit status. So that's a law question I don't know the answer to. But the fact is that there's an equal protection clause in the 14th Amendment, but there's no equitable protection clause. Following Griggs vs. Duke Power, the Supreme Court decided that if there is a difference in outcomes, statistically meaning proportionally, if you have 100 white applicants and 100 black applicants and more, a higher percentage of white applicants get in than the black applicants, that's an inequity in admissions. Then there must be discrimination hidden somewhere. So the Civil Rights act applies. So following that supreme court decision in 71, there's been a equity based misapplication of civil rights law that got codified in the 1991 Civil Rights act into law. So now you have two contradictory civil rights acts. And Obama can appeal to the. He does not want to go to a situation where, say, everybody's allowed to discriminate so long as they advertise their discrimination so that customers can make an informed decision. That's not what he's looking for. What he's looking, which is kind of the reasonable argument space that you were talking about under free association and so on that some people on the right sometimes make. He is instead signaling that he wants to lean into the equity based and in fact the highly biased equity based DEI programming that follows the logic that if there is an inequality and outcome in a neutral situation, then you have to intervene to create the equality and outcome. Which is of course what Kamala Harris ran her entire vice presidency on from the very beginning and ran her campaign on and lost. So Trump is sort of right to rebuke that. And Obama's making a communist argument.
- [45:57]
Dave Rubin
James, watch. As a professional host, I dumb that down. You made a lot of good points using historical facts, but the easiest way for people to understand, understand what you said is that I'm fairly certain Barack Obama would be all for forcing a baker to bake a cake for a gay wedding, gay marriage, a custom cake, not just one off the shelf, but he also would be for Harvard discriminating. And therein lies the rub. Right? You gotta pick one, pick one. Winston, did you have something there before we move on?
- [46:26]
Winston Marshall
Well, yeah, look, I think that's a very interesting analysis and I suspect James is completely correct on that, as he usually is. The only thing I'd push back on is it seems a stretch to call Obama a communist in any literal sense of the term. Right.
- [46:41]
James Lindsay
I'm just going to smile mischievously for a moment.
- [46:47]
Winston Marshall
He's not a communist. He might be a neo Marxist in the sense of identity, wanting to put in identity groups, treat them differently in the sort of postmodernist way of things, but an old school communist?
- [47:03]
James Lindsay
No, no, I don't know if he's an old school communist. He's certainly of the neo Marxist variety that we deal with in the day to day. Another video that's been going around this week of Obama, I don't know if you guys saw it, is him from 1990 participating in the Harvard protest to support Derek Derrick Bell, who was the founder of Critical Race Theory. And it was a similar incident to what we've been seeing on college campuses today, but in 1990. So nobody really knew what it was. And so there's Barack Obama, young man, young activist, trained in the Chicago school of Marxist activism by the Weather Underground activists, standing there in proud and open support over some Critical Race theory based grievance that Derrick Bell had made. I forget the exact detail. And doing one of these demonstrations, one of these communist direct actions, but he is of the neo Marxist sort. He is not of the. I don't think he's what Herbert Marcuse would refer to as a Communist of strict obedience. I would say that it's of the neo Marxist sort, but I don't really distinguish between these things anymore because I don't think they're meaningfully different.
- [48:06]
Dave Rubin
Let me throw one other clip on this because on cnn, you know, we usually show these clips of Scott Jennings, who basically is the one sane guy they put on these panel shows, but they've got another guy who appears every now and again. His name is Shermichael Singleton. I suppose he either leans right or is a conservative, something to that effect. Here he is talking about how just out of control these places of supposed higher education have gotten.
- [48:27]
Unnamed Speaker
I think from my perspective as a conservative, there really is a real battle going on in the country right now between liberalism, conservatism, and what which of the two ideologies will lead the country into the next 50 to 100 years, particularly as we look at China, what their advancements and developments are in terms of usurping US lead globally. And I am not certain that every single single liberal institution that's an Ivy League, I don't think they've really done enough to have intellectual diversity of thought on a litany of topics. I mean, these places are really breeding grounds for some of these. But don't you think that the race in my personal.
- [49:03]
James Lindsay
The race against China is not being fought on the grounds of America, of domestic political discourse?
- [49:09]
Dave Rubin
I would disagree.
- [49:10]
James Lindsay
Scientific labs, it's in the AI labs.
- [49:12]
Unnamed Speaker
It'S in the research. Its culture matters.
- [49:15]
James Lindsay
Oh, yeah.
- [49:15]
Unnamed Speaker
I think customs of behavior matter, Norms matter.
- [49:18]
All right.
- [49:19]
In terms of the health, that was.
- [49:20]
James Lindsay
If China is going to lap us economically and technologically, it is not going.
- [49:26]
Unnamed Speaker
To be because there are five more Republicans at Harvard.
- [49:30]
Dave Rubin
First off, I just want to say, you don't have to comment if you want, but she's. Abby Martin seems to me the most unimpressive person on all of television. Like, she just. There's just nothing going on there. She doesn't understand what culture is. Okay. That aside, Winston, it's good that this is finally like. It would have been nice if we were hearing that sort of thing 10 years ago, a bunch of us were talking about it online. The fact that it has finally bubbled up to CNN and they're addressing what the real problems are. It is like better late than never, right?
- [49:56]
Winston Marshall
Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. And I would say there's a truth in what she's saying, is that China will lap us on technology. And so I'm not sure quite what she said. What issue did you take with what she said?
- [50:10]
Dave Rubin
Well, I meant it as a general. I meant that more as a general thing with her. I just think there's just not a lot going on behind the eyes.
- [50:16]
Gayle King
But.
- [50:16]
Dave Rubin
But that she's ignoring the cultural part he. Because she's basically saying, well, don't worry, we can still do it as far as science and whatever, but just ignore the cultural part. But if we raise. I think James can probably speak to this quite well. If we raise two generations of kids that don't know where their genitals come from and think that the country's racist and that everyone before them was an evil person at the fundamental backing, you know, the fundamental founding of the country was awful. That that might actually lead China to the future more than us.
- [50:43]
James Lindsay
Also, they have much more deep concerns. Oh, sorry, Winston, go ahead.
- [50:48]
Winston Marshall
Well, I absolutely agree on that. I would say it's not just America, it's also European countries as well. We've lost our confidence. And if you look at the polling on the younger generation, whether they would fight for their country if it would be invaded, obviously this doesn't apply to Israel, but the rest of the western countries very much. There's a loss of confidence, there's a self hatred. We think we are evildoers. And it's even worse in Europe. Whereas in Europe, for some reason the lesson after World War II is that all nationalism is bad. Instead of learning that German nationalism was particularly bad, America didn't quite learn that lesson because it was American nationalism that won the war. But there's just this self flagellation that goes on eternally. And I think it's going to be play out for a very disturbing 40, 50 years ahead of us?
- [51:39]
Dave Rubin
James, the better late than never part of this. Does it just make you rip your hair out or you're just like, all right, fine, they did it. Okay, welcome to the party, pal.
- [51:47]
James Lindsay
Yeah, I'm kind of there. I so gave up on these people so long ago that it's like, okay, they're doing it just to address. I'm glad Winston said what he said too, because where he's talking about a generation or two generations, as you said, Dave, of young people who won't fight for their country. That's actually what they're teaching at schools like Harvard. So it does matter that you get these critical theories out or that you at least bring in a counterpoint to those critical theories that can re stimulate whether it's nationalism or whether it's just not hating yourself and your country and everything about it because China will take over or any other country will take over the United States or Britain or whatever, if nobody there is willing to defend it. More than that, if you have a completely divided political populace because of these very polarizing political issues being seeded through the Ivies, you are not going to be in a position to be able to solve actual problems or advance anything. So China benefits strongly. This is why they spend $16 billion a year on political warfare against the United States. From their military budget, they benefit greatly from a divided and fractured United States. They can't agree on things or build things together. And then finally, we've seen in country after country, I was just in New Zealand and there's a huge political debate there about it. They call it Matauronga Maori there, which means Maori ways of knowing and whether or not that should be considered equivalent to Western science. We saw that happen in South Africa with roads must fall and then science must fall. A few years ago. The WOKE will take over the sciences. The AI lab is only safe so long as the AI department doesn't have a me too. And so her point is, like, wonderful in the kind of detached, abstract world where the WOKE aren't taking everything over and causing huge divisions and splits.
- [53:34]
Dave Rubin
By the way, it should be noted. Guys, do you know where she went to college? You'll never guess. Come on, guess. You could do it.
- [53:43]
Winston Marshall
Harvard or Columbia?
- [53:45]
Dave Rubin
Harvard. Yeah, she went to Harvard. All right, we're going to talk about Rumble Premium for a minute. And then chicks in space. Free speech is under attack. But Rumble refuses to back down. We've always believed in empowering voices, no matter how unpopular. And now we're taking that fight to the next level. When major advertisers conspired to pull their dollars, even brands like Dunkin Donuts turned their backs, claiming Rumble had a right wing culture. But we're not here to fit a mold. We're here to defend free expression. To strengthen this mission, we're excited to offer Rumble Premium a completely ad free experience with exclusive benefits for viewers and creators. You'll find exclusive content from creators like Russell Brand, Dr. Disrespect, Tim Cast, and the Mug Club with Crowder. It's more than a subscription. It's a stand for free speech. Your voice matters. Join Rumble Premium for a limited time. You can get $10 off an annual plan using promo code RUBIN. Visit rumble.com premium rubin and claim your discount today. Together, we can turn the tide. Whether you join Rumble Premium or simply keep watching, your support helps keep free speech alive. All right, they sent a couple chicks to space. It Was very exciting. They were up there for four minutes. Didn't do much but check their hair, but. All right, here we go.
- [54:54]
James Lindsay
Got it.
- [54:58]
Dave Rubin
One, two, three. Take your space and you will see.
- [55:09]
Unnamed Speaker
A puff of smoke when it touches down.
- [55:12]
Gayle King
A puff of dust. That's normal.
- [55:14]
James Lindsay
A puff of dust.
- [55:15]
Gayle King
Last milliseconds.
- [55:17]
James Lindsay
Air. Air cushion.
- [55:18]
Gayle King
That will kick up the dust. It's a very soft, soft landing. Despite the sporty perception. There it is.
- [55:32]
Dave Rubin
Guys. I love space. It's one of my favorite places. All my favorite movies take place in space. But these women had no training. The giggling, the hair, the makeup. To me, this was very backwards. If you want people to think that women are qualified to do these things, which, of course, there are qualified women doing these things. We've sent women into space before. James, this is feminism 101, isn't it?
- [55:58]
James Lindsay
I don't know. I saw Earth out that window, though, so this is fake news as hell. What I will say, I hate when we prove the flat Earthers wrong. When I was in New Zealand, I looked at the moon up through a camera, and it was upside down. Like, would exactly, like, around Earth would be. Can you believe this? No. So for me, yeah, Feminism 101, sure. Send up a bunch of token icons and then get mad if anybody complains about it. And the reason, of course, that people are complaining about this is. You know, I was talking to my wife about this last night. I was like, yeah, a lot of people are really upset about these women going to space. And she's like, well, why? Probably because they're jealous because they want to go to space. I was like, well, it's not just that they're jealous because they wanted to go to space. It's that if they would have chose, chosen, like, some, you know, science enthusiast kid who has cancer and, like, this university professor who did this and this engineer who built that and, like, whatever. All these, like, people who did things that are of, like, great note, as opposed to, say, Katy Perry and sent them to space. People have been like, I understand why those people got chosen to get to go to do this really cool thing. So the jealousy, the envy wouldn't be there, but instead they sent a bunch of bimbos. And then, yay, feminism. Like, it's just. They made it fake, and so nobody's happy about it.
- [57:12]
Dave Rubin
Winston, before I get your take, here's Gail King on her ride.
- [57:16]
Unnamed Speaker
I. I don't like that people are calling it a ride. A ride. You know, you never see a man, a male astronaut who's going up in space. And they said, oh, he took a ride. We actually duplicated the route that Alan Shepard did. That's why it's called. This particular capsule is called the New Shepherd. We duplicated that route. That route. No one said he took that ride. It's always referred to as a flight or a journey. So I feel that that's a little disrespectful to what the mission was and what the work that Blue Origin does. We use space technology all the time, whether it's your gps, whether it's your satellite. That doesn't just happen every time a flight goes up. They get some type of. Type of information. Two of the astronauts. I still have a hard time calling myself an astronaut, but two of the.
- [58:00]
Dave Rubin
Astronauts, Winston, we did a little checking. Alan Shepard trained for his first mission for over a decade.
- [58:08]
Winston Marshall
Yeah. I mean, I think this might have set women's rights back maybe 50 years. And I. I initially thought it was funny, but the more I think about it, the less funny it is. Firstly, they never, as she says, call it a flight or a. Or a ride. Normally we call it a mission. And the reason why this hasn't been called a mission.
- [58:28]
Dave Rubin
Right, Right.
- [58:29]
Winston Marshall
No way can this be described as a mission. But the real reason why this has been so damaging to women, apart from all the shrieking and insufferable sounds, the tones we heard coming from the shuttle or whatever the capsule, whatever it might be called, is that they were quite literally in space for 11 minutes. And it seems that they spent all of that 11 minutes on Instagram. Yeah, if you go to space, I would be in all gobsmack. I'd be out the window looking at everything.
- [59:02]
Dave Rubin
Watch them.
- [59:03]
Winston Marshall
Watch them. When they got there, they're literally on stream on Instagram. I mean, it's just so. There's so many great women in the world and that they sent. Or. And maybe I did, actually, to be fair to some. One of them, I think is trained astronaut of some sort and work NASA. But it's. It's so embarrassing, their behavior that I think it does a real disfavor to the brilliant women in the world.
- [59:29]
Dave Rubin
Well, you're. You sound like somebody who obviously never used the sepia filter on Instagram in space. Guys, I do want to do one other thing which we just added before the. Before we started recording with you guys, because our friend Constantine Kissing from the trigonometry podcast, he put up on Substack, an article about something that's been kind of brewing online. And I'm just going to Read you one line of it, and I want your take. Podcastistan is a place where people scold the mainstream media for failing to live up to their standards while having none of their own. And this was to the backdrop of a Douglas Murray, Dave Smith debate, largely about Israel, on Rogan's podcast. And I've been thinking a lot about this because people are putting aside even the specifics of the debate. And you guys are welcome to talk about whatever you want, obviously, as we watch mainstream collapse. And the gatekeeping that you were talking about earlier, James, and most people watching this, I think, agree that gatekeeping has been terrible, especially Covid, I think, blew apart so many doors for people that now they're questioning everything. And you've got people thinking that Winston Churchill was the bad guy in World War II and somehow Hitler was good. And just like the litany of things that we've opened, we've upended. We are finding ourselves in a weird place where everyone's just going off to their corner to find truth. I do the best I can on this show to tell people what I think. I'm going to have some blind spots and make mistakes every now and again. But as we whirl further into podcastistan, as. As Constantine is talking about, is this, like, in some sense the most dangerous thing that a modern society can be in where we're just going to all define truth for ourselves? And in some ways, we have to blame the gate, the previous gatekeepers, because they did not do a good enough job gatekeeping correctly, if that. If I'm framing this correctly. James, feel free to clean that up if you don't agree with the premise.
- [61:14]
James Lindsay
No, no, you're. You're not wrong. So the social constructivism I talked about earlier is relevant, but also what you're witnessing is postmodernism. What he's actually putting his finger on is called the postmodern condition. So now we have, I guess, the alt media, which largely codes right. Podcast to Stan is a great name for it, because if you don't pay your right dues to it, then they'll kick you out that it has gone postmodern. This is the postmodern condition. And everything that went along with postmodernism on the left that sucked is going to here that also sucks. But the social constructivist viewpoint, which, by the way, critical constructivism is the formal academic, academic name for what we call woke, the social constructivist viewpoint is that there's a they out there, the critical constructivist, because you have to be critical theory of it. There's a they out there who have gatekept the institutions so that their knowledges are considered valid and nobody else's outside knowledges are considered valid. Therefore outsider knowledge that challenges the existing establishment is considered more valid. And so that's actually also what he touching on. So this is why these people qualify under a brand name like Woke, right? Because most of them identify on the right, they push so called right wing values and they've adopted a left wing epistemology. I said that in long form with Winston on his podcast when we were at ARC together and talked about the same issue. So they value outsider knowledge that supports a prevailing anti establishment narrative, AKA a critical theory. And so this is what, what we're actually seeing. And of course Constantine has I envious here way with words that is sometimes just positively magical and he's done it extremely well there. I'm a little frustrated with my friend Douglas from that debate because the word that didn't come up from the journalist that should have come up, that needed to come up, that I'm dying for it to have come up, is due diligence. It's not about expertise in that particular discussion they had. It is about whether or not due diligence has been done before reporting is being brought to the surface. And Douglas's point was I've done due diligence before I wrote my book and you haven't done due diligence for the amount you talk about this. And due diligence is a concept that hasn't fallen out of view like you looked up the Alan Shepard stuff that was doing some due diligence on this. You vet all of the clips that you show that's doing due diligence before you put together your show. That's actually a high standard of journalistic integrity. It's not present in podcasting to stand. And as Constantine kind of has poked that baron, revealed, they don't like having that mirror held up to their face, but that's because they're postmodern and don't have anything else.
- [63:53]
Dave Rubin
So Winston, I, I know that this issue is near and dear to you and we talked about it on your podcast a couple weeks ago as well. Do you think part of the problem here is that it's something that I reference all the time that Jordan Peterson brought up years ago, that the left never knows when to gatekeep the left. Right. They never know when they've gone too far. And now we're seeing a version of that on the right for the reasons that James just put out There the gatekeepers were so bad again, I think, particularly during COVID I think had Covid not gone so crazy, a lot of this doesn't happen. But now everyone's willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
- [64:26]
Winston Marshall
Well, I would say I'm so happy that the likes of both of you gentlemen, as well as Constantine, as well as Douglas Murray, are being very quick to call out when the right are going too far. They're making no hesitation, which is not something that we can say about the left and how the woke cult took over the Democrat party and much else. So I don't think that the behavior on this side of the fence is quite comparable, but I'm not sure that this is saying anything new, but perhaps rephrasing what Constantine is observing, which is that I think why I started watching shows like Yours, Dave and and others is because I lost faith in the mainstream media because they. I knew for a fact that they were at best only showing half of the story and at worst intentionally manipulating what was really going on. Who could forget the famous Chiron mainly peaceful protests? What it seems to have happened is sort of what is happening is the sort of an equally bad opposite, which is that the podcast Stan, as Konstantin calls it, is now only showing half the story. And a good example of this. And I would say on a personal level, Joe Rogan is a very lovely man. It's certainly in my interactions with him, but it is the case that he's had on his show a lot of pro or rather anti Israel voices, a lot of anti Ukraine voices, which is not itself a problem. But the problem is they're not commensurate with the opposite side being heard at all. So you're getting one side. And I would even say, you know, Douglas Murray goes onto the show. Dave Smith was on the week before when Douglas goes on, oh, we need to invite Dave Smith on to just make sure everything you say is, you know, checked. And so there's his due diligence there. But so the due diligence maybe is only being applied to one side of things. Now he might come back and say, well, it's not his responsibility to show all sides, it's his show. He can do whatever he want and he's actually right. He can do whatever he wants. But it is the case that his show is, I think, the biggest in the world still. It has been at points and if it's not, it's up in the top five people. He's got an enormous influence. And so if he's not Going to bring on voices to challenge people like Daryl Cooper, who is saying, you know, Churchill was the chief villain wobble tour. In fact, when he, Daryl Cooper went on Joe's show, he said, you've got to take mein camp with a pinch of salt. For which he got no pushback. And I'm sorry, that for me was the moment where I was like, actually, this has gone too far. So, yeah, I think that the duty is on us now to speak up about it.
- [67:27]
Dave Rubin
I would. Or go ahead, James. And then I'll.
- [67:30]
James Lindsay
Yeah. Can I do the boil down trick? You did. So I'll take all this wonderful brilliance of Winston that he just gave us, but it's my dog crap analogy with gatekeeping. Right. So we know not to eat dog crap, but we also know that the like, like ask Maha. It's pretty wild over there. Maha understands make America healthy again, if you don't know what I'm referring to, understands that, you know, they, the gatekeepers at the fda have not been doing their job. Right. Right. They're letting all kinds of, like, fun chemicals. I think Chick Fil A has like, aluminum and sugar or something in the breading. I don't know, something crazy. All these different things have been allowed. Food additives and so on. So the question is, what do you do with this? Right. Is it, hey, you know, they've been lying to us about what's in our food, so let's eat dog crap because anything goes. Or is it. Maybe we need a more responsible regulatory agency that's making sure that all this crap isn't coming through. And so it's, it's very much reminiscent of that. And what we're, What Podcastistan represents is, yeah, we've been betrayed by our, our institutions for not doing their. Their proper role. And therefore, let's just throw caution to the wind, is kind of what Constantine's saying, when it should be. In fact, what we need is to reassert journalistic integrity and rigor to the greatest degree possible.
- [68:49]
Dave Rubin
Gentlemen, I guess our work is cut out for us.
- [68:52]
Winston Marshall
I'll make one other observation, if I may. For years we've been told that the right wing is Nazis and Trump's a neo Nazi and all of this and fascist this and fascist that. But now that there's actual Nazi apologia coming out of certain parts of, of the right wing, I don't hear anything about it from the left. It's weird in it, right?
- [69:15]
Dave Rubin
We were all Nazis when we weren't Nazis. Now there's a couple kind of Nazis and nobody's a Nazi. Or the lefties are the ones etching the swastikas on the Teslas.
- [69:26]
James Lindsay
I don't always wear tinfoil, but if I was, I would say they're giving us enough rope to hang ourselves.
- [69:35]
Dave Rubin
Winston, what does one do in the UK over the weekend?
- [69:40]
Winston Marshall
Well, I'm off to France, actually, which. So on the weekend, one gets out of the UK.
- [69:48]
Dave Rubin
And. James, what does one. What does one do in Tennessee in the weekend? On the weekend?
- [69:52]
James Lindsay
Go out in the sun and work in the yard. It's good old fashioned. Whatever. Build a fire, have a beer.
- [69:59]
Dave Rubin
Basically what I'm doing, but with tequila. Gentlemen, this was an absolute pleasure. You're welcome back anytime. Good seeing you guys. No postgame show because it's Friday. Thank everybody for watching and we'll see you on Monday. Ciao.