A (2:04)

Oh, Dave, I'm doing very well. It's lovely to see you and speak to you and. Yeah, great.

B (2:11)

Well, it is always a pleasure to see and speak to you. And, you know, we connected for 30 seconds before we started recording here, and you said something like, you know, we're old friends in this at this point, which seems kind of crazy. I mean, I think I interviewed you for the first time probably. It was probably fall of 2015, so we're rolling into our 11th year together. You have been fighting for Western freedom Since well beyond that. But I thought maybe for some of my audience that is not totally familiar with you and they should be. And we'll link to all your books below and everything else. There's so much talk about Somalia these days, and I think people are so confused about the history of Somalia, the American Somali population, you know, we talk about Ilhan Omar all the time. Can you just clean up some of that perhaps and maybe connect it to a little bit of your personal journey and then we can dive into some of the issues of the day.

A (3:06)

And don't forget Somaliland. And they want independence and I think it's a good thing and so on. Yes. Well, I was born in Somalia in November of 1969, and Somalia became independent in 1960 and independent from British Somalil land, that is the region that now wants to become independent. And then there was an Italian Somaliland and that's where my father comes from. And also that's where I was born. But I was born after independence. And you know, as I don't know how familiar your audience is with African history, but usually after independence, people have these incredibly high hopes of building nation states that will thrive and that, you know, hold all of these different clans together in different tribes. And for Somalia, that didn't materialize after the white man left because soon after, you know, my father was one of the people who wanted to make a Somalia that looked a little bit like America. You know, you come in and you know, you have founding fathers that designed this beautiful constitution and lay down these pillars and everybody's going to subscribe to that and we'll build this great nation state. That's not what happened in October of 1969. The Soviet Union, I would say, pretty much marches in by using a local Somali sergeant. And ever since it's been chaos. So I was born into that upheaval. But within these great power politics mix of the two. During the Cold War, the two hemispheres, Soviet Union versus United States. In Somalia, what goes, what predated and still goes through and is the permanent, I would say feature of Somalia is the bloodline. It's the clan. And I remember being 5, 6, 7 years old and my grandmother sitting my siblings and I down under a clan under a tree and teaching as our clan line. That's like your passports. I am Ayaan, the daughter of Herse, who is the son of and so on and so on. And so every child is taught that that is your welfare state, that is your benefit state, that's who you fight for and who you die for that's your identity. And to supplement that identity was Islam. And what happened in Somalia, as in many other different parts in the world, was from about the 1980s, Petro Islamism came into our shores and there was an attempt to reverse things so that where Islam supplements the clan bloodline, it became now that the clan supplements the bloodline. In that sense, I don't know who's prevailing at the moment, but there is this. Everything that the clan holds dear, Islam enforces anyway. So when I was a little girl, I didn't have to wear the hijab, but little 5 year olds today in Somalia wear the hijab. Maybe that's the difference. It's an Islamization in a society that was already clan bloodline oriented and Muslim. Right.

B (6:39)

And then. Sorry, go ahead.

A (6:42)

I wanted to say fast forward because my father was modernized. He went to Columbia University. He didn't just accept this coup of Mohamed Siadbari in 1969. He went into exile and mobilized other men and decided to fight him. And this was occurring in Ethiopia, which then forced my mother and my siblings and my mother's mother to leave the country. So I've been exposed to besides Somalia, I was in Saudi Arabia with my siblings. We lived in Ethiopia and we lived in Kenya. And during that time that we were living in the diaspora, we were looked after by the clans. That's just, it's. I just want to illustrate that is how the clan system, how the bloodline works. When people ask me, how did you pay your rent? Where did you get food from? You know, who did this for you? And it's wherever we go, there are Somalis. And if I meet you today, I'm not just going to say, hey, your name is Dave Rubin. I'm going to ask, you are the son of who? And you're going to say you're the daughter of who. And then we try and track the bloodline and we'll get somewhere when we maybe trust one another and help one another, or maybe we'll get to a place where we keep our distance and, you know, we feel that there's a sense of tension and animosity and that's how it works.

B (8:08)

So there's so much there that I think connects to what's going on right now. We don't have to tell the rest of your story at the moment. And again, we'll link to some of those earlier interviews, but you're ultimately fleeing and eventually becoming a member of parliament in Holland and then your friend Theo van Gogh being killed with a threat to you. And then subsequently over the last decade, plus becoming an unbelievable fighter for Western values and individual rights and freedom and all of those things. But I want to focus on the Klan thing for a moment because, you know, there's a video from probably three or four months ago where Ilhan Omar is on, who obviously is Somalian, where she's on stage and she supported Jacob Fry, not the Somali who was running against him, although he, I think, in some sense thinks he's Somali or something like that. And she started talking about the clans that had betrayed her. Are you. I suppose you're not that surprised that they've imported this type of thinking into America when you hear something like that?

A (9:06)

Oh, no, I'm not surprised at all. It's not that they import it. That is just how it functions. You cannot have, you know, 70,000 to 80,000 people from Somalia living in Minnesota and not have a clan dynamic. It's all determined and ruled by the Klan dynamic. What surprises and amuses me is that Jacob Fry decided to assimilate into the Klan.

B (9:32)

Is that possible? Is he the first one that ever did it?

A (9:35)

No, he's not the first one. But anyway, he's decided he was going to assimilate into the clan. He probably thinks he's very clever, but he doesn't understand that this is another form of dancing with the devil where he's going to be fried, as in F R I E D. Right.

B (9:51)

So, okay, so can you talk a bit about. There's a lot of focus now on these roughly 80,000 people in Minnesota, and obviously what's going on with ice and everything else? And so there's. There's the fraud element of it. There's some element connected to illegal immigration, although a lot of the Somalis are legal, obviously through Barack Obama. But what do you make of the whole situation right now that's happening, that's unfolding in Minnesota?

A (10:14)

So it's got three components. There's the Somali ethnic bloodline component that we've just been discussing. And they do have an alternative moral system. They don't see what they're doing as stealing. They see it as helping family and helping the bloodline. And so if there's this alien, weak system that is dishing out money, if you don't take it, you're stupid. And also the assumption is we're not the only ones who would be doing such a thing. All smart people would be doing that. I wrote a piece in the Free Press where I cite Edward Banho, who's just you know, he's trying to explain to Americans about what he calls. He calls it amoral familism. And this amoral, this orientations towards the clan or the in group at the cost of everything else. It's not unique to Somalis. I think it's probably once, once upon a time it was universal. But it cannot coexist within the nation state because the nation state is modern and the clan bloodline system is not just pre modern, it's anti modern. So there's that aspect of it. Is that cland and within that is another circle which is the Muslim Brotherhood and the presence of the Muslim Brotherhood in America dedicated to transforming America and Islamizing it from within. That's what they say. The way they do it and they want to go about is by bringing Muslim communities and turning them into these ethnic blocks that are Islamist and that will vote the way they tell them to vote and you know, will be this demographic representation. Then there's a third layer which is amazingly the Democratic Party, which has created this business model, electoral business model, that they don't want to go and persuade voters about the programs they have in mind. They want to do the exact same thing as what the Muslim Brotherhood is doing, which is pump every state with just enough ethnic voter blocs to vote for them in exchange for providing them with benefits. And none of these three groups, the ethnic Somalis, the Muslim Brotherhood or the Democratic Party, seem to think that that money comes from somewhere. Taxpayers, you and me, do you think we want to finance our demise? That's exactly what's going on. And so there's this conspiracy. That's not a conspiracy, but it is this. Yeah, collusion.

B (13:21)

So since Ilhan is the representative from there and seems to be at the center of this, I mean, do you think she's sort of equal parts all three of those things? She kind of thought, well, do the fraud because we can kind of get away with it. And I'm the representative, kind of has sympathies, let's say, to the Muslim Brotherhood. And then. And then obviously is a progressive in the Democrat Party. Is she equal parts or do you think one is running? It's just hard to understand what's going on there.

A (13:46)

Ilhali is 100% clan oriented. And again, the other thing you have to understand is the Muslim Brotherhood in Minnesota and elsewhere in America is decentralized and it's all delegated to, you know, the Somalis. So the Council of American Islamic Relations in Minnesota is led by, you know, the head of that is a Somali So he's still advancing the Muslim Brotherhood agenda, he's a Muslim, et cetera. And then obviously, the largest membership are Somalis. So there's this hybrid symbiotic relationship that these two groups have. And so Ilhan Omar has to navigate that, and then she also has to navigate the Democratic Party, and she has to navigate the opposition, the Republican Party, the Trump administration that is now onto this cabal, onto this threesome. And they have to figure out how they're going to deal with it. And so this is. Yeah, she's. She's a real politician. I think she's a capable, talented politician. And she. She can put on these different hats, whatever. She. Or head scarves whenever it is convenient. The question is, how long is she going to survive? Because she cannot serve all of these masters at once.

B (15:05)

So as somebody that grew up in Somalia, your first years in Somalia, underwent female genital mutilation, which you've written extensively about, then became really, I would say, a feminist in the true sense of the word, the original feminist sense of the world, for equality in the fighting for the West. You were also one of the first people that I ever talked about, ever heard talking about the sort of red green alliance and the sort of useful idiots that the progressives play alongside the Islamists that seems to be bursting forth in a more obvious way these days. But when did you really first see how sympathetic or confused the progressives in the left were with the radical Islamists?

A (15:46)

Well, I saw that in the Netherlands, and I think in my early encounters with Dutch progressives, I thought it was all coming from a good place. I thought they were people who felt that they were privileged, that they had held colonies in the past, that they were super wealthy. And when I was in Parliament, it was part of Dutch national policy to preserve some of the gdp, to develop other countries, poor countries, to bring poor people from third world countries into modernity. It was part of the national, you know, the Christians active in that country to say, we're going to volunteer and welcome everyone. So that's how I interpreted it. And also, by the way, my assimilation, which is very quick into Dutch society, I thank most of that for Christian volunteers, people who volunteered because little pieces of paper were hung in the church, like who wants to teach to Somali girls the Dutch language? And people volunteered. And then from there, for me, it was truly accelerated. That's how I interpreted it. But then over time, I came to understand and to review that there's an ideological component. People have come to believe that this concept of multiculturalism which is rooted in communism, but it's a sort of soft identity based communism. And that's what they believed. And I'd taken part in those debates in the late 1990s, early 2000s. I don't know. You remember that probably.

B (17:27)

I do, I do, yeah.

A (17:28)

Multiculturalism is the answer to everything. And we were all becoming morally, you can't compare cultures, you can't compare religions. Everything is the same. We don't want to be ethnocentric, blah, blah. So I really thought that that was coming from a good place. And then I went into politics and as a member of parliament, walking the corridors of power, I saw how that went from coming from a good place to becoming cynically, how do we just win elections? And my colleagues were not asking the question, if we win elections with the ethnic vote or if we appease the Islamists, that is going to, we're going to agree, we're going to accept and implement policies that will have very negative consequences for our society. They didn't seem to care. I mean, we would detail those negative policy consequences, but the people who did that would be sidelined, marginalized, and they would be smeared and shut up. And everybody would just go with the dream fantasy of we need to win the elections, that's the most important thing. And we'll do it, we'll win these elections, you know, whatever it takes. Are you on board or are you not on board? If you're not on board, you know.

B (18:46)

And by the way, it wasn't only the Netherlands that this was happening. Obviously this was across much of Western Europe. So. So that leads me to, do you think there is a sort of free Western future, largely Christian future for Western Europe specifically?

A (19:04)

I think now that the populations, large swaths of the populations, who, because these societies were rich, not just the Netherlands, but all these other Western European countries, the United States, Australia, Canada, these are societies that were so wealthy that they could, for a long time, at least two decades that I have witnessed, they could ignore the consequences of, you know, the negative consequences of these policies, but we can no longer do that. Now it seems as if it's not just the working classes who are affected, it's not just women who are affected, it's not just Jewish minorities who are affected, it's not just black Americans, African Americans, descendants of slaves in America who are affected, it's the middle classes and it's, you know, even Silicon Valley. The richest, most powerful people in the world are saying, my country, my environment is changing in a way. I didn't vote for and I don't like. And who are the people who are making these decisions? So as this comes out into the open and these subversive forces, the Islamists, the communists, and whoever has hijacks the Democratic Party, that's what we are talking about now. That is exposed. And I think this is. I think it's healthy. I think it's good. And maybe there's a chance that we reverse these policies.

B (20:31)

So what does reversing it actually look like? Because I've asked a lot of different politicians from a lot of different countries, and, you know, you can get some people or there are certain places, like Hungary, but that's not Western Europe with Central Europe, where, you know, obviously Orban has closed the border. In America, we've closed the border. But there's also a homegrown issue now in Western Europe and in Holland, you know, Geert Wilders, from what I understand, talks a really good game about this, but are they doing anything? Are they. I mean, I think they close the borders a little bit, but are they deporting people? You know, they're still part of the eu. Like, there's just so many conflicting pressures there.

A (21:05)

So what does reversing it look like? I think I would just like to use the American example. After Donald Trump is elected in November of 2024 and he ran on this, I am going to close the borders and I'm going to, I don't know, track all the aliens illegals and deport them. Now, that is the reversal program. It's very, very messy, and it gives, again, these other forces the opportunity to impede law enforcement, to create this sense of chaos. So it is. That's what reversal looks like. I've looked at countries like Sweden. Sweden used to be the most welcoming, the most naive. I mean, if you. I think it's a compliment to call them naive. I think sometimes they were stupid and sometimes they were. The elites of Sweden were insensitive to their population. So they need to be held accountable, but it's okay. Reality is holding them accountable. So now they're at this place where they're saying, remigration, we're going to pay you, Somalis, Middle Easterners, South Asians, we're gonna give you money to go back home. So that's like that soft European approach versus that Trump hard approach of I'm gonna deploy parts of our military to find these people and get them out. That's where we are. You look at all of, how are we going to reverse these policies? It's just going to Be one hell of a mess. It's going to be messy.

B (22:45)

So when you see what's going on in, in some, in, I was about to say in Somalia, but you see, when you see what's going on in Minneapolis and largely in Minnesota right now, same. Yeah, yeah, yeah. When you see that, I mean, is there, is there something, you know, I see a lot of more left leaning people who aren't complete progressives. They'll say something like, oh yes, we understand we had to close the border and we should deport people, but not this way. And I always find that to be a little thin. Cause it's like nothing is perf. I think we've arrested. The last number I saw was less than 270 Actual citizens of America were temporarily detained, usually for about an hour. Out of 700,000 plus that have been deported, nothing's gonna be perfect. But when you're watching what's on the ground there, what do you make of it?

A (23:34)

Well, again, you've got to analyze it and segment it and see who is doing what. The three groups that I talked about, the Somalis, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Democratic Socialists that have hijacked the Democratic Party, those three groups, they like the status quo, they don't want that to change. So they are mobilizing, they're using funding from I don't know who and mobilizing to defend the status quo. And then the Trump administration. I voted for Trump specifically because I wanted him to do something about the border. So those of us who voted for that, we are saying, you know, you can't have. What did you think it was going to look like? Did you think that to the moderate Democrats, that removing illegal aliens, do you think that the people who benefit from the status quo were just going to lie back and accept it? No, they wouldn't. So they're going to throw these subversive efforts. They're going to, you know, the melodrama that's taking place now, ICE watchers, antifa coming in, trying to create this sense that law and federal law enforcement is actually invading Minnesota. I mean, all of that was to be expected. They were doing that in 2020. They were doing that for a very, very long time. They do that in Europe. It's all of these NGOs. That's. So to me that's not surprising in the least. And then it is the Republicans, the moderate Democrats or people who used to be moderate Democrats, the independents, we've got to come together and say, how do we do it if Trump is doing it? Wrong. What would be the right way to do it? So one of the complete complaints I've had is why should eyes be covering their faces? Why are they traveling in unmarked cars? That's not, you know, that's not what we should be doing in America. But then we live in this Internet age where officers, families are threatened, their faces put online, they are doxxed. How do we go about that without escalating, without then bringing the actual military in? So I don't think that there's going to be some kind of neat and tidy way, some very clean way that's going to please the lady somewhere with her little pal chin. It's going to be very appealing. There's no way. It's not gonna happen. It's gonna be messy.

B (26:19)

Are you saying you can't deport thousands of people without spilling a little tea as you're sitting there in the afternoon?

A (26:26)

Yeah, you can't do that. And also that you have to, to realize that these three groups that I just told you about, they are weaponizing that. Minnesota, nice. You know, Minnesotans saying, oh my gosh, that's not how we do things. How do you do things? You know, when I lived in Holland, it used to be we talk to them. The guy who murdered Theo van Gogh, when he was chasing Theophan go with a gun in his hands, Theo was saying to him, can we talk about it? If that's how you want to approach it. You know, it's also going to end in a different kind of mess. So we just have to. Yeah, we have to come up, I think with those of us who love America, we have to come up with a unified way of saying, we know it's going to be messy, but we have to inform the public about who these three groups are, what their objectives are and the sorts of things that they're doing and not fall, you know, amongst ourselves, fighting amongst ourselves. It's just not productive.

B (27:26)

Right. And it's worth noting. And again, people should watch some of our earlier interviews, but when Theo van Gogh was killed, the murderer in the middle of the street then pinned a note on his chest, on his jacket, saying, you know, in essence, ayaan, you're next. But, you know, what does this tell you? You know, when we joke about the sort of the women drinking the tea that don't want this to be messy and sort of don't understand what reality is, that there's going to be some things that, you know, look a little upsetting or whatever. What does this tell you of the state of classical liberalism because, you know, a decade ago when I started saying I'm not a progressive, I'm an old school liberal, you were saying very much the same thing. You and Bill Maher and Sam Harris and a couple other people. But it does seem like even the phrase classical liberal is sort of lost on people at the moment, at least from an American context. For me to explain to people, yes, I'm a classical liberal. It doesn't even make sense anymore because the word liberal has been so mucked. But do you think there was a flaw in the classical liberal minds in some sense that we need the conservatives to do a little bit of the dirty work because classical liberals tend to more so be the woman with the.

A (28:32)

T. Yeah, I think classical liberalism does not have missionaries. And so, number one, classical liberalism does not have missionaries. And number two, they don't realize how incredibly western and white and privileged classical liberalism is. And so classical liberals are talking to other classical liberals. And we all vehemently agree with one another and we love each other's company, but we don't realize that there are people and they also don't realize we're a minority and that a lot of people across the world hate classical liberalism and what it has. Classical liberalism gave birth to modernity. And even when you analyze classical liberalism itself, Christianity gave birth to classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is a product of Christianity and the Christian arm is the missionary arm. It's the one that used to go out to the world and tell them about how wonderful Christianity is and eventually get people with a classical liberal sensibility. And so unfortunately, what classical liberals have done is they have, they neutered the Christian arm, their missionary arm, and we're paying a huge, huge price for that.

B (30:08)

How do you think your own evolution is connected to that? Because obviously born Muslim, you were a well known sort of new atheist for a while, and it's just in the last couple years that you've converted to Christianity. So I sense your own bedrock thinking is now connecting back to that arm.

A (30:25)

Yeah, I am. So I'll just put aside sort of the personal story of that. But in this intellectual, you know, a defender of classical liberalism, I don't think I stopped asking the question. So where does that come from? What is it rooted in? And I think for a long time I listened to people who would jump from the Enlightenment period to the Greeks and Romans because they didn't want to say anything about Christianity. But if you do it, you know, diligently, you are going to go back to the Christian roots of classical Liberalism. And then you're going to realize that it couldn't have had classical liberalism, the secularized version of it could not have come about without the tolerance and the freedom of conscience that Christians promoted, without this insistence that what governs the individual conscience is the Sermon on the Mount. Without going back to this figure, Jesus Christ, who was. I mean, analytically, all sorts of people would just say, you know, there was Jesus and there was Muhammad, there was Moses and this, that and the other. But if you're really honest with yourself, you're going to discover that Jesus is unique. He's different, his teachings are different. He brings about a revolution without ever using any kind of violence. And to this day, places where his teachings take hold look very different. That's another thing that also got me by. I started to reflect on when we lived in Kenya, the Somalis were called shifters. So we Somalis, as a tiny minority living in Kenya, we were causing about probably 80% of the trouble there. And looking at the Kenyan Christians, and they had an aversion towards violence. The ones who practiced Christianity today, you look at a place like Nigeria and you compare the Christian Nigerians with the Muslim Nigerians, and it's just astounding. And it's the same South Korea, North Korea. You look at, you know, Christian Lebanon and Christian Lebanese and Muslim Lebanese. So there is something about Christianity that is unique. And that, in my view, I've come to accept that is true. And that if, as many of my classical liberal friends have done, if you try to divorce the two, the outcome that you like from its foundational pillars, because you consider that superstitious, you get yourself and your societies into trouble, and that's where we are.

B (33:11)

And by the way, for people that want to know more about this, this is what, as you know, Ayaan, Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson did, I think four public events debating this, literally this very topic, in essence, you know, did it all just start in the Enlightenment, or was there something, Was there something before it? So if we take what's going on now in America as it pertains to immigration, not just Somali, but we've closed the borders. We're kind of cleaning things up. Maybe we're leading the world again. Are you hopeful at the moment? Are you bullish on the west at the moment? Or do you think we have just now 10 years of just crazy fighting to get through this? Maybe it's different for every country.

A (33:53)

It's going to be different for every country. I'm bullish on America. I see a revival of Christianity I also see people, some of the most intelligent people in America asking these questions, you know, just like you said, some Harris and John Peterson were having this conversation. They are not the only ones who are having these conversations. These conversations are being had in Silicon Valley and Washington D.C. they're being had in Texas, they're being had in Wall street, they're being had in Miami, you know, from our friends. So I know that things will get worse and then they will get better. But I am bullish as long as we have these conversations because I'm also really confident that human beings have not come up with anything better. And so, you know, let's take Islamism to its logic. Imagine if they actually do conquer the west and conquer the world, where will they take humanity? They'll take humanity to death and destruction. Life will be short and nasty and brutal. If the Communists, whether it is neo communism, the one that's identity based or the one that's economics based on give them the world, let them take control, you know, let them have with it. Where will they take the world? Same thing, mass murder, starvation. Life will be short and nasty and brutal and tyrannical. And so humanity eventually will just have to end up with what is the alternative? So what is the narrative, the idea for life? And that led me to conclude Christianity, right?

B (35:35)

So the question is if we're to progress as a species in a positive sense, not in the progressive political sense, we keep getting dragged. How many times do we have to basically be dragged back to the abyss before we learn some of those lessons? So to that point, so when you.

A (35:51)

See Judeo Christians, biblical again, again I want to point for instance to Israel. And there are very secular atheistic hardcore Israelis. But Israel is not led by those hardcore atheists, it's led by biblic Israelis who want to say that the identity of Israel comes from the Bible and that they want to have a society based on that, that is democratic, humane, fair and defends the rights of its individuals. And I think that's where things are going.

B (36:27)

When you see the endless onslaught militarily but also PR wise that hits Israel from every which direction, I suppose, just relative to everything we've talked about here. None of that ever surprises you, right?

A (36:40)

No, none of that surprises me because again, Israel is seen as the, the Iranian Islamist regime has articulated it in the most clear way. It's the little Satan. So their goal is let's destroy Israel first because they see Israel as an obstacle to their bigger goals and then the big Satan, which is America, they think they have Europe in their pockets because of the demographic shift and the Islamization that they're waging through the Islamist organizations, in particular the Muslim Brotherhood, and through the weakness that they sense of the European political elites, which is really weak and confused and backwards. We talked about it earlier. So they think they have Europe in their pockets. They think that if they destroy Israel, that will give them a chance to go after America. And right now the Iranians Islamic regime of Iran, which I hope anytime will fall, but they think that they have working relationship with Putin, with Xi Jinping against the west and they're relying very much. They cannot rely on military superiority or economic superiority because America is militarily superior. So that is not the toolbox they're using. The toolbox they're relying on is subversion. That is this long term plan to transform things from within. That's what they say. That's. I mean, I'm not making it up.

B (38:22)

They say, no, no, this is, this is quite literally what Brigitte Gabriel has been, you know, yelling from the rooftops for years that there is an absolute plan by the Muslim Brotherhood to subvert Western democracy. So do you think Trump has done enough in terms of dealing with the Muslim Brotherhood? We've obviously sanctioned some of the branches, but apparently not Turkey and Qatar, which seem like probably the worst too. Is he waffling on some of that? Do you have a sense of what's going on there?

A (38:50)

I'll tell you, one of the things that is what I really, really admire and I think it's just been absolutely great at, is destroying these nuclear facilities that Iran was developing. There's just a huge setback for them. And then him drawing a red line and saying if the regime continues to kill, he'll interfere. So it's just, I'm still fingers crossed, hoping that he's going to do more than that. But removing that regime from power is going to be, it's a big deal. His interference in the Middle east, where he's persuaded some of these countries like the uae, Saudi Arabia and others to develop this narrative of why don't we work together towards some kind of building a prosperous trade, that sort of thing. That's all very good. Forcing the Europeans to think about NATO and paying into NATO, but also paying for their own defenses. That I think is absolutely great. What else? I think in America we can now speak openly about all of these things without between 2020 and 2024, how worried we were about being picked up and silenced and so many people were being debanked.

B (40:14)

Yeah.

A (40:14)

And so that's all over. Elon has bought Twitter, turned it into X. So we have. I don't want to. I'm still at the place where one year on, I'm cheering on the Trump administration. I'm also doing this because, not because I'm uncritical, but because having been in government before, I know how incredibly messy it is. It's not. You don't go into Washington D.C. and fix things. You go into Washington D.C. and you Wade through a swamp, and it's so hard to wade through that swamp. And every time you put one step forward, you're pushed back another two. But you just have to keep moving forward. So as far as that goes, I have got more to cheer Trump and the Trump administration about than I'm disappointed in. I want to call on the sort of stuff that you do, the cultural ecosystem of people on the right or people who defected from the left but who haven't quite become part of the right, is to say it's just crazy if you turn on one another. If in November 2024 you realized it was an existential threat and now you're turning on one another and it's the midterms, it's just two years on and we're looking towards 2028, it's like, you guys, you're getting it all wrong. You need to hold hands, just like they're holding hands. And so stop these internal fights and focus on where you need to focus. That would be my advice.

B (41:55)

Yeah, you know, you know me, we've discussed this privately many times. I try to stay above it. And then you get yanked into these things. You're wise because you really limit your X usage. And I think that probably maybe that had something to do with your religious awakening as well.

A (42:11)

Well, I think maybe it's also the. I actually have been in politics and know a little bit how it works. And in an election year, if a party seem to be divided, the electorate always think they have a reason to stay at home. And the last thing we need on our side at this moment is apathy. I think it's apathy that's going to get. I'm not worried about people defecting to the Democratic Party, but the Democratic Party will win because the people who should be voting for the Republican Party will stay at home. And why will they stay at home? Because they are fighting about the most trivial things that I can only imagine. It's just all one big distraction. So the things to focus on is, this is existential. You know, if I don't vote the world is going. You know, I've contributed to the end of my country and my civilization.

B (43:10)

Right. One of the things, one of the things I've been trying to explain to my audience is, you know, I'm with you. I think Trump has done an unbelievable job almost at every level. Only a year in, I mean, he still has three more years, but if he loses, if the Republicans lose the midterms, he likely gets hung up in impeachment. Two years he's a lame duck, and then we just hand this thing to Gavin Newsom or worse, and then we've lost all of the genuine progress that we've made. So it's a dangerous time is show.

A (43:39)

Voters what it looks like to live in a city government led by Zohran Mamdani. City government led by the woman in Seattle whose name I don't seem to recall.

B (43:55)

No, I know she's even more radical than the previous guy who didn't want to jail people. He just wanted to know their life story.

A (44:02)

I mean, we've been through a lot in San Francisco and in the bay and all over California. Show people this. We live in the Internet age. And those are the images we should be sharing, the stories we should be sharing. How come California burned down and no one is held? The mayor's still in place, the governor is still in place, the AG is still in place. How come no one in California has been held responsible for a fire that wiped out almost all of Los Angeles? That's what we should be talking about. If we are governed by those people, this is what our lives is going to look like. They're going to take our taxpayer money and pocket it and give us these lawless, chaotic, poor places. It's just, it's crazy.

B (44:51)

Let me, let me ask you one other thing which maybe, maybe ties this all together. So in all your years of doing this and, you know, feeling the betrayal of the left that I certainly felt, you know, a couple years after you and aligning with some of the people on the right and still having your classical liberal values and going through your own religious transformation and everything else, have you learned any tricks? If you meet a young woman and there seems to be more sort of on the female side of this where they're being affected by a lot of this woke stuff, you know, you meet a 16 year old woman that comes to one of your talks or something that's on the fence about a lot of this. Have you learned any tricks over the years on how to deprogram? That's one of the questions I get most. So maybe I can just repeat some gem out of you.

A (45:39)

A lot of young people, not just young women, but also young men, are looking for people to look up. They're looking for an elite to look up to. So there's the disappointment in the existing leftist elite, and an alternative elite is just shaping up now. And so it's much easier for me today to say, hey, you know, you could become. Your life could look like this. You could. And we talk. I also talk more openly about things that feminists, modern Marxist feminists, either don't talk about or belittle, which is motherhood and being a wife and having children and loving it and, you know, that whole domestic side of being a woman. And then what do I do? If I have a degree in. And I'm very intelligent and I've worked for all of these, you know, these tough choices. That's what some of these young women want to talk about. And I have no problem talking to them. And I also find a lot of receptivity. I think the mad. The angry, mad, crazy, ugly feminist narratives are on their way out. Charlie Clark did a great deal. I have to. We've got to thank that man for a lot. The transgender agitation went far too far. People like Riley Gaines, young women started to, hey, I don't want men in my locker room. What's that all about? And then the feminist leaders, the people who had the power and the voices, you know, the Oprah Winfrey's of this world, they were either silent or they went along with that rubbish. And so a Supreme Court justice who during her nomination hearings said, I don't know what a woman is. We need experts to define that. I think that sent a message to a lot of young women that these are not your role models. Katanji. Whoever is not my role. And so that is, I think, where we are now. We have to create new role models who are beautiful, successful, healthy, invested in life, family, service, and who love their men. We don't hate men. We love men. We despise the men who don't protect us. We don't like the men who misbehave. But we can only be protected by those bad men from good men. So we're invested in the good men.

B (48:19)

Well, you're giving me the easiest ending ever, because I am looking at and talking to one of those women right now. So it is great to see you, my friend. Keep fighting. I know I don't have to tell you, because I know you will. And I hope we can do this in person next time.

A (48:33)

Thank you. Yes, Dave, thank you also for what you do. It's always wonderful to see I have.

B (48:39)

Nothing better to do than save the world, you know?