The Great Replacement Conspiracy: Liberal Student DEBATES Michael Knowles

You're evading the question.

I'm not.

What's the number?

How many migrants should America take in for you?

There's a process, and we should lend everyone who abides by that process, right?

Oh, so it should be unlimited.

It should be unlimited.

You know, even after being screamed at, sprayed with fluids, burned in effigy, and nearly blown up on campus,

I still love speaking at universities.

Which is why I was thrilled when this semester's YAF speaking tour brought me back to my old stomping grounds, Yale. How do you prepare to give a speech on campus? Well, what most sensible guest lecturers do is either wing it or just give the same speech over and over, which is very tempting.
But I like to write a new speech every time because it lets me really focus in on the most pressing issues of the time, whatever's going on that week, what's going on at that place. And the current events angle gives me a greater ability to lure the audience into whichever obscure philosophical point or tradition I actually want to talk about.
The principle is sort of like a little bit of sugar makes the medicine go down. How far in advance do you write these? I generally write them, if I can, before I am walking on stage.
That is about the earliest that I write them, though. There have been times I've been pulling up to the school, still finishing it.
But most of the time, I have finished the speech before I had to give it. How did you think Yale would respond to your talk titled, An Open Mind Makes Your Brains Fall Out? Do you agree with the title of his speech today? Not necessarily.
Not necessarily. That sometimes happens.
Anybody agree with this? I agree. Yeah.
Do you agree? I don't like Michael Knowles. I'll say that.
Oh, okay. Yalies are all extremely left-wing.
It's generally known as the gay ivy. It's certainly the opposite of populist.
And the main political divide on campus is between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. But Yalies are also sociopathically ambitious.
So I actually did not expect histrionics. I knew to expect a more clovable kind of protest than the humiliating left-wing displays that other students put on at other schools.
So, you know, these kids, they don't want to lose their Goldman Sachs job. I knew they were going to be more subtle about it, and I was not disappointed.
The libs who showed up at Yale, though wrong, were polished and respectful, including the treasurer of a group that I once regularly would beat in beer pong, the Yale College Democrats. Who won beer pong? That's an interesting question.
No, no. Who won more rounds of beer pong? Looks like the Republicans won.
Woo! Seriously? Looks like the Republicans won. I think it's great when we have prime individuals come to campus and why I vehemently disagree with a lot of what Michael Knowles stands for, I would like the opportunity to have a sort of civil disagreement and see which ideas went out.
Unfortunately, my producer did not bring any solo cups or natty ice, but he did bring a couple of chairs so that this young liberal Yalie and I could sit down face to face. Zach, thank you for sitting down.
Of course. So you're the head of the Yale College Republicans, right? No, they're very opposite.
I'm the treasurer of the Yale College Democrats. Democrats, okay.
That's all right. I played a lot of beer pong with the Yale College Dems when I was here.
I'm all for that sort of bipartisanship. So you came up, you disagree with me.
I do. On a lot of issues.
Did I persuade you on anything? No, you didn't. Well, the thing is, I do go to a lot of conservative events, so I generally do hear some of the ideas you've been expressing.
You've rejected them? Rejected them. Okay, any in particular? Well, I'd really like to talk about immigration.
You know, I just saw there was an innocent man who was sent to El Salvador by Donald Trump, and he had no criminal record, you know, and he was sent to El Salvador based on a crown tattoo. And it seems pretty clear now that he was not a gang member.
But now you might also observe there was an innocent girl named Lakin Riley who didn't do anything wrong. She was murdered by an illegal alien welcomed into another country by Joe Biden.
And that's horrible, but I would, it's not an either or proposition. Taking someone like the barber and sending him without due process to El Salvador is not saving people.
I think you can have a moral immigration policy where you protect innocent people in the United States and you also do not hurt innocent people by sending them to basically a forced labor facility. But it occurs to me that we all only focus on the sob stories when they come out of the American right.
But when we look at mass migration, where under Joe Biden, we had millions and millions of illegal aliens come into the country every single year. And it wasn't just Biden.
This has been going on in Democrat and Republican administrations. Four decades now.
It seems to me we never focus on the sob stories of the Americans who some were murdered, some were raped. Some just had their society turned upside down.
Some have lost jobs. Some had their wages suppressed.
We never focus on that. And so, OK, one guy during a mass deportation scheme, one guy falls through the cracks and maybe should not have been deported, but he was.
I don't know. To me, I look at that and I say, hold on.
You only have one mistake out of however many thousands since the inauguration. Those actually aren't terrible numbers.
No system is going to be perfect. What's the alternative? I think the alternative is, first off, you need an immigration system where people have a path to legally enter the U.S.
Why? Because we're a nation of immigrants, number one. Are we? We are.
I don't think so. Everyone, my grandparents fled here to flee the communists, right? But my great, great, great grandparents came here on the Mayflower, which is a great cigar company, by the way.
And they were not immigrants. They were settlers.
They weren't indigenous to the land. But they were not immigrants, exactly.
And we've had long periods of American history where immigration was drastically reduced or virtually non-existent. So this notion that we're a nation of immigrants is a relatively modern notion, is it not? We'll get to more across the line in just one moment.
First, though, if you want the latest news, if you want to understand what the news actually means, you got to come check out and subscribe to The Michael Knowles Show every weekday at noon Eastern. I will take you beneath the surface of daily political events to reveal their historical, philosophical, even religious roots.
Catch it Monday through Friday, noon Eastern. Now, back to Cross the Line at Yale.
Well, I'm going to give two arguments, right? The first one is the moral argument. I think we have a duty to help others.
I know you're a man of faith. I am Jewish Jewish? I am Jewish.
I wouldn't have guessed that. Yeah, I mean, a lot of people wouldn't have guessed that.
But there are actually 40 Asian Jews on campus. But digressing from that...
That's got to be like all the Asian Jews in the world. It's a significant number of us.
But I want to make this point because I think it's important, right? Which is that, you know, number one, I think you have a duty to help others. And even in, you know, Isaiah, it says, woe unto those who pass evil laws who hurt the poor.
You know, don't want to oppress the poor. It's a sin that cries out for vengeance.
The second is the economic reason, which is that immigration, in addition to being, I think, morally right, is hugely beneficial for the US economy. Undocumented immigrants alone pay $100 billion in taxes.
And the other statistic I wanted to share is for every undocumented immigrant you deport, you actually are losing American jobs.

There's a study that came out that says because of the net effect of people who are going to innovate in the economy,

work the jobs that a lot of Americans might not want to work.

That's how a lot of people get started.

I think they might work.

You might have to pay them higher wages than slave or feudal wages to Guatemalan peasants,

but then that's the point. You should pay a fair wage.
My first job, I worked for a landscaping company. Most of the people were from Central America.
I also speak from Spanish. I'm bilingual in Spanish and English.
Hard-working, great people. Not all of them had immigration status, but we were out there cleaning people's yards.
No one says illegal aliens can't work, but they just aren't supposed to be here. Well, my point to you is that you asked me why I favor immigration.
And I said there's a moral issue, but also the fact that economically we benefit as a nation. Again, $100 billion in taxes paid by undocumented immigrants.
And in fact, they pay social security taxes, but don't get social security because they're not U.S. citizens.
However, one can also pull up studies about the net drag on the economy because immigrants, both legal and illegal, are more likely to receive welfare benefits than native-born American citizens.

Dramatically so.

Illegal immigrants the most, legal immigrants next, native-born Americans after that.

So you're saying, I just want to make sure I'm getting you correct here.

You're saying that undocumented immigrants are receiving more welfare benefits than no immigrants. I don't think that's true.
And I actually would love for you to give me that study because I'd love to read it. If it were true, would that change your view of mass migration? It would make me like, I mean, it would be a really stunning fact and it's definitely not true.
Would it change your view? You're saying it's... It would cause me to consider.
So again, because I still have the moral argument here, which is that, again, I think you should help people in need. Okay, should Japan take in an unlimited number of migrants? It's not...
Should Israel take in an unlimited number of migrants? So 3% of the U.S. population, and we can quibble over numbers.
Again, I know Trump always says 18 million. I see Pew that says 11 million.
So that's... I've seen 11 to 16.
It's hard to track. But the United States has 340 million people, right? And we have 11 million, maybe you say 18 million, undocumented immigrants.
That's around three or 4% of the population. So the entire notion that we'd be taking over by immigrants is just not true.
So you're just talking about illegal immigrants, which are conservatively ranked between 11 and 16 million. But when you talk about all migration, when we're talking about all of mass migration, we presently have the highest foreign-born percentage of the population that we've ever had in American history.
So you would grant that having foreign people in the country creates at least some social issues, some problems of assimilation. Would you not? Well, I look at the Fortune 500 CEOs, and I see tons of immigrants there.
I'm not just asking about GDP, buddy. I'm talking about society.
So I'm actually very curious about this because an issue I've seen people in your political lean talk about a lot is culture. What would you identify as American culture? Because to me, the American culture is always changing.
It's a living culture. We do things differently now than we did 20, 30 years ago.
Some people- Right, why? We used to speak English in this country, and recently we speak much less English, and you have to press 1 for English because of... And you have a problem with that? Yeah, I think it's good for a nation to have a common language.
There's so much more to say. First, though, go to hillsdale.edu slash Knowles.
History, economics, classical literature, constitutional interpretation. Did your education cover these foundations? Probably not, if you've been educated in the last 40 years.
So, while our world constantly evolves through time and technology, certain fundamental truths about humanity and our place in the universe remain unchanged. That is why I'm excited that Hillsdale College is offering more than 40 free online courses in the most important and enduring subjects.
Learn about the works of C.S. Lewis, the stories in the book of Genesis, the meaning of the U.S.
Constitution, the rise and fall of the Roman Republic, and the history of the ancient church with Hillsdale College's free online courses. I personally recommend Hillsdale's course Theology 101, The Western Theological Tradition.
This course examines the great questions of Western theology from the ancient Hebrews through today. Learn about the nature of God as revealed in the Bible.
Explore the great theological questions and controversies of the early church. Study this history and the history of the Reformation, of the Counter-Reformation, of so much more.
Hillsdale makes it so simple to increase knowledge and curiosity. The course is self-paced so that you can start whenever and wherever.
Go right now to hillsdale.edu slash Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S. It's free.
It's easy to get started. hillsdale.edu slash Knowles, hillsdale.edu slash Knowles.
So I think, you know, most people in the U.S. do speak English, right? And again, my first job was working with a Spanish-speaking crew of landscapers.
Yeah. And you know what? That's a problem when a country doesn't all speak the same language.
Because we all did speak the same language in all of American history until very recently. Well, I think we're melting pot.
Why do you think that? This is, well, there's a ton of benefits. Where does the idea of the melting pot come from? I don't know the origin, but I like that.
It comes from a play in the early, I think it was the early 20th century. And it was a good play.
It was written by a Jewish playwright and it was watched by Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy Roosevelt loved the play, and he complimented the playwright there.
And it's about a Jewish guy who wants to marry a Gentile girl. And this creates a lot of problems culturally, but they both decide that they're going to leave some of their old identity and melt in to the American identity to assimilate.
So first of all, that means giving up one's cultural identity to a large degree, though it does also mean adding a little bit. You're adding something, right? That's the analogy, right? You're adding.
But you're giving up a lot of your own culture. And you have seen this in waves of American migration that have caused problems too, when it was the Irish, when it was the Italians, when it was the Jews, when it was other people.
The problem with more recent mass migration from Latin America, especially illegal immigration, is you don't really see so much giving away of the native culture. You don't really see people hurriedly learning English.
They didn't used to have press one for Italian back in the early 20th century. So the problems of assimilation have gotten much worse.
And I guess the question I would ask to you, since you're unwilling to say whether Japan, which has virtually no immigration, should, you know. And they have, your population is plummeting.
Like, you know, any economist right now would tell you that Japan is actually in a lot of trouble because they don't have enough people there. And frankly, immigration would help them.
Is Japan an immoral country because it doesn't take in a lot of immigrants? Is the state of Israel an immoral country? Well, the difference here is that we have millions of people who are fleeing harm and coming to our doorstep. And they're asking us, please help me.
Right? And from a... Yeah, because they know that we'll let them in because Joe Biden invited them.
Now we don't have anyone really coming to our doorstep because Trump has made clear that he's going to deport illegal aliens. Well, I saw those photos of CBP, you know, the border app, people who had scheduled legal appointments.
Then Trump cut that off. And I think you might like that.
But again, again, even. But I think you're evading the moral question because I'm not beating up on Japan and'm not beating up on Israel, and I'm not beating up on Italy, which doesn't enforce immigration laws but probably would like to.
And I'm not beating up on virtually every other country on Earth. Do you think that those countries are immoral because they don't just throw up in the border? Again, so the analogy is a little flawed here because I'm saying there's millions of people coming to the U.S.
who are asking for help. Japan doesn't have millions of people showing up at their doorstep to the extent that have that same thing.
Just this past week, CBP and NGOs at the border have closed up shop in certain places because so few people have come to the border since Trump's deportation policies. Well, the other Trump policies, right, with regard to the border, right, you know, the separation of, you know, children from families.
He's trying to do things to deter people from coming that are cruel, right? And it's part of the strategy. He's not just sending them back.
He's just enforcing the law. What's he doing that's cruel? That's different than any other president's done? What he's doing is different.
So a judge, no, no, the El Salvador thing really gets to me. And again, we're two months into the admin and this really gets to me.
You're saying maybe one guy accidentally said cruel. Not one guy.
These were people. The issue here is, this flight had 300 people or so.
I don't

know how many innocent people were on the... 300 innocent people.
Not all innocent, right? Some

of them probably were. Some of them I assume were good people.
But the point is, this speaks to,

you know, I think we should hold our government to a high standard, right? Sure. But what's the

standard? Because you're evading the question. I'm not.
What's the number? How many migrants

should America take in per year? You're asking me to make an immigration policy number. I think.
Just asking for a simple number. You're the one arguing that we have to take all these people.
Okay. I can actually do this because I've done a little research on this topic.
I think the U.S. used to accept something around like 100,000 refugees a year.
Right. And I would say.
And Trump has gotten that to zero. I could at least tell you right now that I think, you know, accepting those 100,000.
So you're 100,000. Well, I'm just giving an example of a program.
That's what you want. That's migration every year? 100,000? You got a deal.
No, no, no. I'll take it.
I'm talking about refugees specifically because the refugee acceptance program is specific. But I'm asking you about total migration, how many per year? I think there should be a process where, based on merit, like I'm not getting, because the people come to the border and there's actually law here and it says when you request asylum, you have to meet a certain number of standards.
Would you agree the vast majority of migrants are economic migrants, not asylum seekers? Would you agree with that? I think there's different motivations for people. And what is the motivation of most of the migrants? Is it economic migration, or is it asylum? Sometimes both, because if you live in a society where there's no functional police, and you stand up a little bit, and then you're threatened by the gang.
And then you come here. You're telling me that the primary motive for millions of illegal aliens- People seeking a better life.
I think that is- Seeking a better life is very important than seeking asylum. Well, it fits in the category, right? Someone seeking asylum wants a better life.
They're trying to escape violence. A square is a rectangle, I guess.
But a rectangle is not a square. The people who are seeking political asylum because they're under imminent danger in their home countries.
Credible fear is the standard, right? They are. But they can't get in now because Trump has stopped that, right? So my point to you is, I think it's really wrong when people who actually are meeting the legal definition for credible fear.
There's a set of laws in place. You said 100,000 people, we're going to take those.
Well, that's specifically the refugee acceptance program. I was giving you.
Why won't you give me a number for total migration? Because I think it's case specific. Because again, there's a process.
Let's say the case of America every year. How many migrants should we take? You're the one advocating for migration.
How many? Again, I'm talking about the process for how people come into the nation, right? And that could be 2 million. It could be 3 million.
But it's based on whether they have credible. I'm saying based on whether they have credible fear and they meet, again, I'm not an immigration attorney, but I know there's a standard.
You're an American, right? Exactly. I'm just saying.
So I'm asking your view as an American citizen. Yeah, and I'm happily giving it to you, which is that there's a process and we should let everyone who abides by that process, right? Oh, so it should be unlimited.
It should be unlimited. But by the process.
Okay. Which is what, since Reagan, right, since Reagan, we've had a process for the way that asylum seekers come to the U.S.
So we finally got into an answer, which is if people abide by the process, an unlimited number of migrants should come every year. Well, right now it's around 2 to 3 million.
So I'd say you go, there's 2 to 3 million, come through the process, and everyone who qualifies comes in. Now, what would you say? I'm completely fine with that because, again, the two arguments, morally, you help people in need.
And number two, we benefit hugely from an economic level. So there's no limit, the moral argument? I'm going to give you another.
I've been wanting to put in this fact, which is that if we were to increase the number of refugees we accept in this country by just 10%, we'd increase our GDP by a billion dollars. And in fact, the average refugee we let in, once they've acclimated, of course, they actually have a higher income than the average American citizen.
And the reason is when you flee persecution, when you flee violence, when you flee with your family, you have a vested interest in working really hard and striving and living the American dream. I'm a little skeptical that the Somalis committing crimes in Minnesota are really going to take GDP much higher.
But even if it were true, a country is more than GDP, we would admit. And so I guess my last question.
There are morals as well. Sure.
But a morality that only seems to apply to our country and not others. No.
My question, the last question to you is, there was a Harvard-Harris, I hate to bring up Harvard at Yale, but there was a Harvard-Harris poll that said that most Americans, when you ask them if they support immigration, they say they do. When you drill down into numbers, the majority, a clear majority of Americans, would like immigration to be 500,000 or fewer total per year.
That's legal and illegal, which would represent a drastic reduction in migration. This was not just one random poll.
This was backed up in a survey that came out last year. Harvard Harris.
By Gallup polling. Harvard Harris was the first one.
Gallup was the first one last year. I went and Gallup, Another one.
Which also reflected that most Americans want to drastically reduce all immigration. So you want immigration to be in principle unlimited and practically to be two to three million per year.
Well, I think that's a straw man, right? You just said that to me. No, no.
What I'm saying to you is there's a process, right? And I can't give an exact number, but around two to three million is what I would expect for the amount of people coming to the U.S. I don't know how many of them will meet the credible fear, et cetera.
But I'm just saying we need a legal process, and Trump has stopped that legal process. No, there is still a legal process.
The border invasion declaration, again, I actually just made a presentation on this, so I know the facts, which is that he has stopped even the legal immigration. You keep going back to this point because you're evading the question that I'm asking you, which is if the majority of Americans want to drastically reduce migration and you want to keep migration at multiples of that level and keep it there or even increase it, why do you get to win out? Why don't most Americans get to win out? I dispute the premise of your point, right? Because I think if we were to...
What's the premise? I think the premise is self-government. If we had a...
Let's just say this was an arena. There's a thought experiment where let's say everyone is watching a debate, right? And everyone will then come to a conclusion of the debate.
If everyone's watching, and then I tell everyone, you know, I give them two arguments. Number one, the moral one that I've given to you, and number two, the economic one, they would go towards five times.
Again, we have a difference. This is probably a difference of opinion here.
Okay, so you're saying the majority of Americans in both of these polls have called for less migration, drastically less migration, because they just don't understand how great migration is. No, no, no.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that.
I don't know what the, I'd have to look at the beautiful arguments for it. I have to look at the exact, so I'm a bit of a polling nerd.
I look into the polls and the cross tabs. And, you know, if you ask Americans, you know, their opinions on like helping others, on immigration, et cetera.
They love it. No, yes, they love helping others.
And they're way out, they don't like it. Wait, wait, wait.
But they're way out of line. They completely disagree with what the Trump administration is doing.
Because again, there's horror stories out of nations. But most voters voted for Trump campaigning on mass migrations.
But I think people also voted because of prices, right? I was actually knocking doors in Pennsylvania. I love knocking doors.
From that, a lot of it was the prices, which now are going up because of Trump's tariffs. Americans care about helping others.
They care about- Well, I'll make a deal with you. If your argument is it was really just because of the terrible inflation under Biden or whatever, the price is going up, and the Democrats want a campaign on promoting mass migration in the midterms and in the next presidential election, I'm all for it.
In fact, I might even donate to that campaign. That's not the campaign I'm talking about.
I'm talking about a campaign that is about fundamental values, about, first off, not just values that spread to every issue. And ensuring, right, also in migration, right, that we treat the poorest of the poor well.
Two to three million a year. Great.
Whoever comes through the process, legal process, not trying to get down. All right.
I appreciate the conversation. I'll see you at the midterms.
A pleasure to meet you.

It's great to meet you as well.

Hopefully the next time

we're back at Yale,

you will be the treasurer

of the Yale College Republicans.

I think that's a little unlikely,

but we'll see.

It's easy to join a protest

and shout someone down.

It takes a lot more courage

and curiosity

to sit down and talk,

especially with little old me.

Until next time.