Investigating Agencies, Turkey's Diplomacy, and Culture Wars

Hello and welcome to the Victor Davis-Hansen Show.

Victor is the Martin and Ely Anderson Senior Fellow in Military History and Classics at the Hoover Institution and the Wayne and Marjabuski Distinguished Fellow in History at Hillsdale College.

He is an author of 27 or 20, I never know whether it's 27 or 28

books and is a scholar and a classicist and a philologist.

We really like that about Victor, and we'd like to talk about cultural things.

So, this is partially a cultural episode this Saturday.

So, I hope everybody's having a good weekend.

And we are going to get right into

the left shock of Republicans investigating our agencies after these messages.

We'll be right back.

We're back, and Victor, I hope everything is going well today.

We have our left, some of our left news commentators very shocked that the new house with led by the Republicans might investigate the FBI and other agencies.

And they're talking about how it may ruin our intelligence communities, that this is a witch hunt.

And it's a strange thing to watch that.

I don't know how anybody watches those news outlets anymore once we know that all that we know from Twitter.

But I was wondering, what were your thoughts on this outburst?

Well, it's very bizarre because you remember that

people still reference the 1975 Senator Frank Church Committee, which investigated the overreach abuses of the CIA in particular, but also occasionally the FBI.

And they found improper,

it was very funny.

They not only found, you know, things like assassinations and torture on the CIA part, but they found

illegal surveillance and spying on American citizens.

But more importantly, they found major journalist and news organizations cooperating with the CIA to

turn people in.

And this was just an outrage.

So a guy like Carl Bernstein used to write for Rolling Stone.

And

people like that would just outrage that the government would partner with journalism.

Okay, so let's

fast forward

a half century later.

And now the House is in Republican hands.

Jim Jordan, the attack dog, is going to be the head of this weaponization of the government committee.

And

what's the result?

All of these people are outraged.

It's the weirdest thing in the world.

These leftists,

liberals, civil libertarians, they say, this is horrible.

You're going to destroy careers.

This is so mean.

How dare you?

And then they get people, it's almost surreal.

They get people.

I just sat back and I watched a few Fox News shows because that's the only one that has clips of MSNBC and CNN and even network news.

And it's amazing because

they get these people on there and you just say to yourself, you have an automatic Pavlovian response.

So John Brennan comes in.

This is very dangerous that, you know, these people, I think, uh-oh, lied twice under oath to a U.S.

Senate committee about surveillance of Senate staff commuters and assassination

drones.

And then the next time, John

James Clark.

Oh, stop!

Lied under oath about the NSA spying on people.

And then they turn to, you know, an Andrew McKay.

Oh, stop!

Lied four times to a federal investigator,

according to the AG, I mean the

IG Inspector General.

And then all of a sudden, Michael Hayden, Michael Hayden, yes, I remember him.

He accused the President of the United States of adopting Auschwitz tactics by having cages on the border, which apparently were inherited from the Obama administration.

So that was just so strange that every time one of these liberals and these left-wing people got on, what they were doing was defending the CIA, the FBI, the DOJ.

But what were they defending about?

What were they worried about?

They're worried that the Republican investigators are going to call in people, put them under oath, subpoena them, and if they lie, they're going to issue a criminal referral.

If they don't show up, they're going to issue a criminal referral.

And why is that so mean?

Because they know that that's what the Democrats did.

They know that they established that de facto principle, and now the Republicans are just going to use it again.

But more importantly,

they're afraid because they knew that

what has happened?

The FBI, what does the FBI not do?

What is it not capable of doing?

Is it partner and pay $3 million to a social media company like Twitter to ban, shadow ban, ostracize, suppress the free expression of people on Twitter?

Yes.

In fact, it got so adamant and those demands on Twitter is they finally had to say, we don't do this stuff.

Is Adam Schiff terrified?

He's always quoted, yes, because he read into the House record a lie.

His Schiff report was a complete lie.

But then more importantly,

he went on to Twitter and had them, you know, he sicked them on Paul Sperry, an investigative journalist.

He didn't like what he wrote.

And so

it's just mind-boggling because because when you think of the FBI, they wiped the data clean on subpoenaed phones in the Mueller investigation.

They fired

Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, but they hid the reasons why they fired him and they staggered their departure so you wouldn't make

the connection.

They took the false dossier of Christopher Steele's, which they knew was false, and they cut and paste it nonetheless and used that as the sole basis to spy on Carter Page and others.

The felon, Kevin Kleinsmith, an FBI lawyer, he doctored an email.

That's a felony, and he pled guilty to it, to deprive the civil rights of an American citizen.

He was an FBI lawyer.

Can I interrupt you here and just ask?

So, what if these people come in and they either do lie or that they find out something went wrong?

Isn't the House relying on a Justice Department that will actually go

in and try them?

And why would the Justice Department do anything to organize them?

Well, the Justice Department, it's very funny because

they've kind of been so hubristic.

They established all these protocols in the Trump years, tear up the State of the Union on national TV,

deny Republicans memberships in committees, issue criminal referrals, and they're not going to be ignored like Eric Holder.

I mean, subpoenas.

If you don't turn up, like it's Steve Bannon, you're going to be arrested and charged.

And then, if they don't like what you say, they're going to send a criminal referral.

So, what they're scared of is they that's all a part of a projection.

They know that they have far more exposure.

Say what you want about.

You can read the bulwark and all those crazy people about Donald Trump and their obsessions and fixations with him, but just tell me when they say he views the economy.

What did he do?

What did he do to abuse the constitution did he spy on the associated press like obama did he spy on fox news like obama did he do a hot mic quid pro quo with the russians was he architect of russian reset did he use hammers to break up devices that were under subpoena like hillary clinton did

he lie under oath under oath like andrew mccabe

did

republicans try to get somebody to wear a wire to entrap joe Biden?

Did they have an ambush interview against somebody in the Biden administration analogous to Michael Flint?

So they have all the exposure.

So what they're doing is they're terrified that even with Merrick Garland, some of this is going to get out in the public domain and

they're going to suffer the wage of not just hypocrisy, because they're not civil liberties.

These people are fascists.

They really are.

They are so regimented and so controlled.

They're not like the messy Republican Republican parties.

When you saw that scene on the House floor, all those votes for Kevin McCarthy and people screaming.

You looked over at the Democratic side, they were just so

cold, stone, sober.

They were like members of the Duma or the Paul Bureau.

It was like, okay, now Hakeem Jeffries, vote.

And bam, 212.

It was like a Pavlovin response.

Not one Democrat abstained or voted present, not one.

And when,

I don't know what it was, 16 or 17 wanted to cut off aid to Ukraine, bam, they were done for.

That is the most regimented, top-down, tightly controlled movement that I've ever seen.

It's not like the old Democrats.

And

it's fascistic.

It really does believe.

that they are so morally superior and sanctimonious and on a mission to

fundamentally transform the United States at any means necessary or justified.

So they don't see anything wrong with doctoring a FISA warrant because it's against Donald Trump.

They don't see anything wrong with lying under oath like McCabe, or feigning amnesia like Mueller, or claiming he can't remember like Fauci 170 times under oath, or claiming you don't know what you're, you don't, you don't remember anything like

call me 245 times, or

leaking a presidential private memo, FBI director goes to the president, assures him in a complete lie, you're not under an FBI investigation, memorializes the conversation, then leaks it to a third party of the New York Times.

My God, they're capable of anything.

And they know that.

And they are scared.

So they've got these talking points.

When I say disciplined, I just don't mean the Democratic members of the House or Senate.

I'm talking about the fusion, the Nexus joined at the hip, the media, because when you see the talking points go out early in the morning, and then that starts to be regurgitated on PBS and

NPR, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, it's always the same language.

It's the whistle,

it's, you know, it's the walls are closing in.

Or tonight, I was listening to them, and here's what it was.

They found these very, you and I talked about that, and incriminating

10 or more.

We don't, and by the way, the information is only coming from Biden's lawyers.

Think of that.

They were shocked.

So they volunteered the information before it got in the hands of, I don't know, somebody, but why would we believe any of those people that there's just 10?

But it's apparently classified information on Ukraine and the UK, an ally.

That could be very embarrassing.

and Iran.

And he had them in his office.

Okay, we discussed that.

And they are so paranoid that this will allow Donald Trump to get off because they thought they had him.

And they leaked that he was in possession of nuclear codes and he wasn't nuclear secrets.

And he took these things.

But they know deep down inside

that Joe Biden was vice president.

So he doesn't have the ability to declassify things.

So they were all classified.

And they know that Donald Trump, you can argue back and forth at what point he decided that they were declassified.

And he has that right to as president.

So they know that.

So what do they do?

The talking points go out.

The right will try to make a

moral equivalence between the two, but that is completely...

completely outrageous.

And it's the same vocabulary.

It's like an echo chamber.

They're very scary people.

and

they're arrogant because they feel they have social media and they've got big corporations and they've got the regular media and the print media.

And they're scary and they feel that

if you disagree with them, you're a racist or you're

an election denialist or an anti-vax, whatever slur or smur they could do.

And they're very arrogant.

They never, ever believe that when they violate customs and protocols, that they'll ever, ever be used against them.

So they were going to get rid of the filibuster.

Remember that?

That's all they talked about.

And then guess what happened?

They won the Senate back.

And

they had the Senate, excuse me, and they were going to lose it.

And

when they had the Senate,

They didn't want the filibuster.

They wanted to get rid of it.

And then they were afraid they were going to lose it.

And they were very quiet about it.

Right?

Yes.

And now they've got descendant again.

And

there's not going to be a filibuster.

The point I'm making is when they're in the minority, they want the filibuster.

When they're in the majority, they think it's an archaic, racist 19th century, as Obama said, relic of Jim Crow.

That's what they do.

And they just make things up as they go.

And we were all supposed to say, wow, these are really moral people.

They were were always that way.

People should remember in the 60s and 70s and 80s, I went to school with these leftists.

They were all affluent.

They were all self-righteous.

They all feigned that they were against the man and they were against the establishment and they were on the, they weren't.

They were always cowardly.

They were always,

I think, totalitarians.

They were always group thinkers.

And they haven't changed.

They just look older.

You know what I mean?

It's like being, when I look at them on TV, it's like being at UC Santa Cruz in 1971.

You know, I just thought I always would say that if it paid better, these people that had long hair and were coming to classes and shrieking and selling drugs, they would be fascist.

And now it pays better and they're fascist.

Yeah.

You know, they have that image of zombies that they use all the time now.

And that's what it reminds me of, just vacuous heads all walking in one direction and doing the same thing.

It's scary.

It's really scary.

And it's, you know, it's

every time I,

it's uncanny.

Every time they have somebody that gets on there and says anything, you know, it's like, okay,

we know, you know, they put Fauci in and he's, he's lecturing.

I said to myself, you can't even answer the truth in a deposition.

You were wrong about masks.

You contradicted yourself on vaccination.

You dismissed herd immunity.

I'm supposed to listen to you when you say that Trump or his supporters were issuing disinformation.

And then you think, wow.

And then they get Andrew McCabe on there as an expert or James Baker as an expert or,

you know,

thankfully, James Comey has been so diminished, I don't think that he's going to be on there very much.

But it's just striking.

It's just really eerie.

And then, you know, on the Ukraine, they get these CIA people.

And I'm thinking, wait a minute, you are one of the people who got the 51 former intelligence officer to lie right before the election to try to warp an election by attesting that the laptop is probably Russian disinformation.

Or then they get a retired general on there.

You know, they get them on there and they start to lecture us about this and this.

And I say to myself, wait a minute, you've got a big defense contract.

You're a lobbyist for a defense contract.

You're on the board of a big,

It's just,

you know, it's something about the left, they feel that if they're for the quote, unquote, the people,

of the people, by the people, that that gives them a blank check to do anything.

And it's very old.

It goes all the way back well before the French Revolution.

It's back in ancient Greece.

Reminds me of the people of the country.

They remind me of Cataline.

They remind me of the Catalinians, the Cataline Revolution.

They're just

aristocratic but bankrupt people, and they use

these,

they really project

whatever they're capable of or they have sinned, they project that on other people.

And you can see why Biden was doing it.

When Biden said on 60 Minutes, when he attacked Trump for taking those documents, to Mar-Lago, you know that you knew that he did the same thing.

And when they talk about the Russian disinformation, you know that they were trying to disinform us about the laptop.

That's what they do.

Yeah, and you know that they're going to try to say that Biden's people packed it up.

He had no idea that those things were in there.

They're going to say they were of minor importance, that classification is an arbitrary process, that it, and then they're going to get the probably the most bankrupt genre in America today is fact-checking, as I said earlier, politi fact,

snopes.

They all start with an obvious lie on the left.

And they say, ostensibly, people have suggested it, but under close examination, and this is the key word, and in the proper context, it can be interpreted a different way.

And then it's judgment, not a lie.

And so that's how they always work.

And they think they're so cute.

And what they don't understand is they have turned off

55% of the country doesn't go to movies.

They don't watch the NBA.

They're starting to wise up and say, if your kid graduated from Stanford or Princeton, it means nothing.

They're mediocre institutions that are totally woke.

They're like Soviet Commissar universities.

And you should not send your kid there.

I mean, think about it.

We'll talk about that.

But

they don't understand how

they've ruined their brand, and now they're in politics, and they've destroyed the border.

Everything they have the unmitas touch, everything they touch goes to dross.

The budget, the border, crime, energy, self-sufficiency.

And I don't know what drives them.

It's just a constant frenzy to go to one

extreme to the other.

And they're so worried about

the middle American.

And yet when you look at America, how odd that the old Confederacy that was completely economically devastated and suffered under this racist Jim Crow

has become enlightened.

And so if blacks are going to places like Atlanta or they're going to Tennessee, everybody is.

They're going to Florida.

And the North.

is like the old Confederacy.

It's got a one-drop rule everywhere in the North.

If you're 116.

It's got Jim Crow.

You can't even go into a Berkeley theme house if you're white.

It's got safe spaces.

It's got like the plantation class, right?

Two classes, the plantations and the peasants are slaves.

That's what Silicon Valley is.

They just drove there last week.

It's all these wealthy people.

And then there's all the people lining El Camino Real, coming out in the morning at five in the morning to go work, and they're sleeping in Winnebago.

They

You just answered what the question I was going to ask, which is how do they keep getting elected?

It's so obvious these policies that they have and these agendas that they have that they're no good for America.

And I agree with you, but they still keep getting themselves elected.

But I think it's because of that, the class, the aristocratic class, and their family.

They start with the idea that

we mastered the system, especially during globalization.

We're the wealthy people.

We've got so much money.

We make so much money that there's nothing anybody can do to hurt us.

Nothing.

We make six, seven, eight hundred thousand dollars if we're a mid-lift professional or a million or two million.

And we're connected to the right people.

Our kids go to the right schools.

We marry the right people.

And we're going to feel really bad about our privilege, but we're not going to feel bad about it to do anything about it.

We're just going to

champion the poor.

And then they tell the poor, you are the victim of racism.

You're the victim of

protectionism, nativism, homophobia, misogyny.

They say all this stuff, but we are here to help you.

So we're going to take this federal government and we're going to go after the upper middle class, not the upper upper middle, but the upper middle class, the middle class.

These are all the deplorables.

the irredeemables, the dregs, the chumps, the self-employed, the entrepreneur.

We're going to go after these people and they owe you something.

And we're going to make sure you have an open border.

We're going to make sure you got all these entitlements.

We're going to make sure you've got a lot of COVID money.

But damn it, if you don't repay us

at the polls with complete fealty, then we're going to call you an Uncle Tom.

If you're a black representative like Byron Donaldson from Florida, we're going to say that you're just a lackey.

That's what we're going to do because they hate those people, the worst.

They feel they're ingrates.

Yeah, they sure do.

do.

We see that again and again.

Well, Victor, let's go ahead and turn to Turkey,

who

for the past few weeks or so, we see, and I'm going to pronounce his name all wrong, but Erdogan.

Threatening the Kurds.

Did I do it?

Well, okay, great.

Threatening the Kurds, the Armenians, the Greeks, and he seems to be growing closer to things

countries like Russia and Syria.

So I was wondering what your thoughts are on the direction of Turkey today.

It's a very strange thing.

You know,

I first went to Turkey in 1973

to Didyma and Ephesus, Miletus, Priene, Pliny, and then I went all the way, went down to Anatalia.

I've been there 10 or 12 times since,

and usually always in connection with being in Greece.

And I've watched it over the last 50 years.

And now it's gone from a secular pro-American state to an Islamicist anti-American.

But more importantly,

it's got this new image of itself.

It's neo-Ottoman.

It's not the out of Turkey, you know, the secular Turkey and using the English alphabet and banning the Feds and all that.

No, no, it feels like it's the theocracy that's emerging.

And it does this under Obama.

Remember, Obama said it was his window to the Ottoman,

to the, excuse me, the Muslim world, and that empowered Erlayan.

Of course, he went after Israel and everything.

But right now, what is the status of NATO's largest army?

It's got the largest army in NATO, and it's the only Islamic country.

Wow, I didn't know that it had the largest army.

Yes, NATO.

It has the largest army by far of the NATO,

of all the powers in nato in the army yeah and okay

and this is really interesting

in

in in

insurlik air face air force base and that's around uh the corner you know uh toward the

syrian border

We have still about 50 of these huge old B-61 atomic bombs, and they're stored there.

And we can't quite figure the relationship between those bombs and the Turkish government.

When they had that failed coup about five years ago, they shut down that base and stopped American personnel from free movement.

And there was a great worry that those bombs, everybody wants them out.

But from time to time, Erlian threatens us and says, don't take them out.

And you get the impression the reason he doesn't want us to remove them is he feels feels that if he gets into an existential war, he has the ability to grab them very quickly.

They should never be there.

They should be completely gone.

We had him as an integral assembler of parts of the F-35, the NATO fighter.

And now he's not part of that because he bought a Russian,

the 400 Russian anti-missile system.

And of course,

He had the electronics that he could just give the Russians and so that they could design a missile that was particularly adept at taking down the NATO fighter.

And now he's, I mean,

think of all the persecuted people in the world right now.

The Kurds, he went into Syria to go after them.

And the Armenians, 3 million American Armenians, he's after them through

Azerbaijan, that Nagorno or whatever, Karabakh, Nagorno, Karabakh, I think it's called.

They lost that war, and

Armenia is really squeezed.

He has a propensity to go after

small countries or displaced people or vulnerable peoples, Kurds,

Armenians, especially Greeks now.

There's only 11 million Greeks in the world, in Greece, a few million in Cyprus, but he hates them.

He just announced, I could not believe it, a NATO power said that he would be sending missiles into Athens.

He said they want someday they're going to wake up and they're going to be surprised what they find.

And we can send a missile right into, we have these new missiles.

And

they've got a huge drone

industry and they're selling the drones to people like China, Iran,

Russia, especially, and Ukraine.

They sell them to anybody.

But my point is, they don't act like a NATO member.

They tell us, the NATO alliance, we don't want Sweden in,

we don't want them, or Finland in the alliance.

And then we have to accommodate them.

So at some point, and then, of course, they have the historic valve at the Bosphorus so they can block anybody going in the Black Sea.

So all of this,

you know,

is very disturbing.

We've got to go back to World War II when there was this, you know, write the deal on the napkin myth that we told Stalin, we being Churchill and by Association Roosevelt, that he could have Eastern Europe and cancel his promises,

but we would make a deal and Finland and Austria would be non-aligned and not in the Warsaw Pact or NATO, but we would get to have Turkey and Greece.

So we gave a lot up to keep Turkey Western.

And now

I don't know.

I don't think it's I don't think by any definition of the term it's a NATO member.

I just don't think if anybody was in trouble, that the Turkish army would march in to help a democracy.

It's the most anti-democratic country in the Middle East.

It's a dictator.

Yeah, and

it seems to be on Russia's side in this war with the Ukraine.

So rest of NATO.

Yeah.

That's anti-American.

It's dangerous.

It's big.

And

it's, it's.

I think the Greeks are, it's, I could not believe this because when I, the years I lived in Greece, it was course varying.

Because of the 67 coup

and then the further coup all the way from 67 to spring of 74, it was very hostile to America.

And when you had that crazy Papandreou, he was very, hated America, despite his American wife.

But Greeks were very anti-American, even though they had this huge expatriate population in the United States, so they had some reason to be.

But now,

I think they look at Turkey and they think, who's going to restrain these people?

Because they want to kill us, they want to get, they want to absorb all of Cyprus.

They want to, and I think the only people there is is the United States.

And so we've been a little bit more,

we've reached out to the Greeks.

And I confess a prejudice because I lived in Greece, I'm a classicist, and I have a lot of Greek friends, and

I have a prejudice that that I feel very strongly supportive of Armenians,

Israelis, Greeks, Kurds, all the people that are in that, they're in very difficult locations historically.

Yeah, and difficult because Turkey's sitting right there.

Well, I mean, we just look at history.

There was two Holocaust.

There was one at the turn of the century, and then there was one under the cloak of

World War I.

I think the three loci of Armenian immigration were Boston, Los Angeles, and Central California.

And so I grew up with

the grandchildren and the children of that diaspora.

And the Turks slaughtered over a million of them.

And yet, if you said that that was a genocide, they would go after you.

Who stay?

I'm sorry.

The Turkish government.

I mean, it was just

they were just paranoid.

And then they went after,

they're very hostile to Israel.

I know that Israel is trying to triangulate and have Netanyahu sees it as an opportunity to find some commonality with Turkey, but

essentially they don't like Israel for a variety of reasons because the Muslim world doesn't like Israel.

And they feel they're the new Ottoman leaders of the

Muslim world.

They don't like the Egyptians.

But more importantly, they don't like the Kurds, of course.

The Kurds have caused them some terrorist problems.

And it's got, I guess it's 20% of the population of Turkey.

So they would like to get rid of the Kurds.

And so, and they have that history of it.

That's what's so frightening about it.

They've had a history of killing Armenians.

They've had, they occupied Greece for 400 years.

And it's, it's,

it's a very,

I know that people listening to this say, advocate, what's wrong with you?

Turkey's a modern, successful member of NATO, and it was almost in the EU.

If they had gone in the EU, it would destroy the EU.

Why do you say that?

Why do you say that?

Well,

every country in the EU is democratic, and to the degree that any strays,

like Poland or Czech,

the Czechs or the Hungarians, just a little bit, i.e.

they're conservative, that the EU goes out and sanctions them.

What would they do with Turkey?

If Turkey was in there, there's no free elections in Turkey.

It's all rigged and there's no free expression.

So all Poland would say, or the Czechs or the Hungarians or Romanians, look at these people.

What are you doing sanctioning us?

And their economies are functional, but Turkey has hyperinflation.

Every time he's in an election year, he just prints a bunch of money.

And so,

you know, it's just antithetical.

And then,

do you really think with declining fertility

in Europe, and you're going to let in this huge Islamic country as a member of not just NATO, but the EU.

And Erdogan, every once in a while, visits the expatriate community in Germany.

And is he sober and judicious?

Oh, hello.

I'm so glad that we have this wonderful relationship with Germany, that we have guest workers.

And no, he's always trying to stir up the pot.

And

I mean, I'm not defending the German government that doesn't seem capable of assimilating people, but,

you know,

I just

think it's time for everybody quietly to disengage.

And by that, I mean just very quietly get every atomic nuclear weapon out of Turkish air base.

Very quietly, just cut them completely off.

We've almost done that from any joint munitions project.

Don't be beloved.

Don't try to antagonize them, but be very careful about investment with Turkey, anything.

And

because it's not a reliable, it does not like the West.

It does not like the United States.

And unfortunately, you know, for us, it's a huge country.

You know, it's got, you know, it's got a third of a million square miles in area.

It's got, I don't know, 85 million people.

And it's, I think it's larger than Germany now.

It's the largest country as far as population.

Germany is about 80, 81.

And

when I talk about

size, I'm talking about non-U.S.

when I say largest NATO country, I'm talking about non-US.

Yeah.

To digress a little, notice that your statistic on Germany at 80 million, that was about how many they had in World War II.

So Germany hasn't been growing at all, if that's right.

I don't know.

Yeah,

80 million.

But remember,

they lost a lot of territory.

They lost Alsace-Lorraine, and they lost most of East Prussia.

So Poland absorbed about,

I don't know, 10% of Germany, and they lost another 10%.

But you're right, they haven't grown because Japan after the war was actually a little smaller.

I think it was like 76 million, and it's up over 120 million.

But when i say that it had the largest uh number i mean outs of the nato group i mean outside of the united states i think yeah we used to have two they have almost a half a million people and they're armed forces and

they're you know when you when you go to turkey and you read the i can't read turkish but when you read the english language papers it's all triumphalism about what we're going to do to the Greeks.

And when you go to Greece and you see this 10 million people versus versus 84 million, and you think of the history and the fault lines on religion and everything,

it's pretty scary.

Yeah, it is, especially given what's going on between Russia and Ukraine.

Turkey may just decide to brush off its saber.

Who knows what's going to happen, but the problem with Ukraine, as we talk, is that

the longer that war goes on,

the longer there's going to be opportunities, windows, temptations for other people to pursue agendas.

And it's not just China and Taiwan.

It's other agendas as well.

And that's Turkish agendas, that's Middle East agendas, that's Iranian agendas as the world is distracted.

Yeah.

Because

we don't, NATO and the United States

are exhausting their reserves.

And

so, but, you know, that's another thing that's so strange.

The left would never support any war.

It was the most hawkish.

How dare you get involved in the internal affairs in Iraq?

How dare you get involved with Vietnam?

And all of a sudden, it's on to Moscow.

We've got to help Ukraine.

They can win.

We've got to give every single thing and we've got to defeat and kill all these Russians and cleanse them out.

And we've got to do all this.

I'm not saying, I mean, I support Ukraine's effort to reestablish its sovereignty.

But but my God, the enthusiasm for this death and destruction on the left, it's really uncanny.

See, what I'm trying to get at, Sammy, I'm kind of clumsy, but today I'm trying to say, wait a minute.

This was the long-haired, hippie left, let it all hang out, free speech, Mario Savio,

and don't trust the government.

The man's wrong.

Peace, not war.

Peace, not war.

And all of a sudden, it's like this grim

Stalinist, follow the manifesto, no dissension, no free expression, hate speech, be woke, support Ukraine or ALS, or you're a traitor.

That kind of, it's really weird.

It's scary

because they can always say, well, we're just doing it for the people.

We're for equality of result.

We're for racial justice.

We're for helping the immigrant.

You're the enemy of the people, and we'll deal with you.

That's how their attitude is.

It's really, I find it really frightening.

And when you meet them in person, and

I meet them every day,

it's even more frightening.

Well, Victor, let's go ahead and take a moment for some messages and come back and talk a little bit about the universities speaking about the woke movement.

And just to preview, I know we've talked about universities before, but maybe we can look into what are the alternatives for education for young kids out there.

But

we'll listen to these messages and be right back.

We're back.

Victor,

we talk a lot on your show about the wokeness of universities and so the

paltry educations, if I can put it that way, that they're delivering.

But I thought maybe we could talk about two things.

One,

the speed of the transformation of these universities into woke.

And then what are the alternatives for people who want to do something so they can have a career, want some sort of education or something for a career?

But

first quote, let's do the first.

We all knew that

the 1950s was the elbow patch liberal with a pipe at the university, kind of the eccentric, but he was a classical classical liberal.

That is, he kind of made fun of his conservative students, but he didn't go out to get them.

And there was always, you know, in the English department, there were three or four netty conservatives, they thought.

And then we went into the 60s, and it was, how can you teach Greek when people are dying in Vietnam?

So it was politicized.

But they were the anarchists and the free speechers, and,

you know,

don't shave your legs, wear petulia, sell that kind of stuff.

And then we had the culture wars and the Jesse Jackson, ho, ho, ho, Western Civil's got to go.

We hate Bill Bennett.

We hate Alan Bloom.

We hate Saul Bellow, the three B's.

Okay.

And now it's different.

These people, as I said in the context of these earlier topics, they're fascist.

And so

as we reach veritable equality of opportunity and they don't get the desired result, that is, we have all of the civil rights

anti-racism legislation, but then

they don't see a perfect demographic proportionality, then they have to find racism.

The university does.

That's where it starts.

So they start adding adjectives.

They can't find racism because it's systemic.

You can't find aggressions because it's micro, that kind of stuff.

And

what's happened,

this was coterminous with globalization.

So they got very, very wealthy.

And it's also synonymous with this kind of cutthroat bicoastal profession where power couples and your kid has to be have a cattle brand.

Princeton.

My son is at Harvard right now doing his doctorate in

psychology.

And I've got a daughter out at Stanford with environmental studies.

And I don't know where my youngest is going to go, but

I guess we're going to make a Yaley out of him, ha-ha.

That kind of stuff.

That's what you hear.

That's how they talk.

And

so when you look at what they've done to the university, it's woke, and

they empowered this wokeness, and it was like they were on an operating table, and they were creating a Frankensteinian monster.

And now it's risen up, and they don't know what to do.

So what's the effect on the university?

That means essentially there is no free speech.

If I say Victor Hansen's going to give a lecture

at

Stanford University that would be a public lecture in which he

makes the argument for the pro-life movement.

that there's a natural binary of two sexes

and

he feels feels that the time has come to eliminate affirmative action.

I would not get out alive.

And they would attack you.

And then there would be some administrator that says,

as much as we stand for free speech and we followed the Chicago principles,

this was bordered on hate speech.

So it's understandable why some of our first generation people of color students.

See, that's how they talk.

And so there is no free speech.

Is there a merocratic system?

No.

We saw that when our discussions of the new admissions.

So if you have 23%

at Stanford that are so-called white students and maybe to half of them at most, because 52% will be women of the new incoming class, and you're not requiring, it's optional to take the SAT and you're not releasing the information about who took the SAT that was admitted, but they seem to be very happy to tell people they rejected 70% of those who did take it, who had perfect scores, you can see what's happening.

So the grades are becoming inflated, and the courses are becoming watered down.

And what's happening, they don't even know it because they're so

right in the middle of this revolution they created and they unleashed these furies.

They don't understand what's happening.

But people looking in are starting to say,

well,

okay,

If you're anybody but a wealthy, wealthy, rich family, and you have a white male son, he's not going to get into Stanford, probably not to Harvard or Yale.

No working-class people will be there.

And they're going to let in people who, I don't know whether they're qualified or not, but according to their own standards of five years ago, they're not, they don't make the SAT scores.

And they probably don't have the GPAs.

Okay, but let them in.

So then you're going to, though the grades are inflated.

And guess what?

Employers are starting to see people come out

since George Floyd.

It's been two and a half years, and they're not impressed.

And they don't have the skills that

$250,000 education once assured an employer.

Hired a Harvard graduate, a Stanford graduate, a Yale graduate.

a UC Berkeley graduate, and what do you get?

You get somebody who can work for you and has a good vocabulary.

She's a very good writer.

They have good analytical aptitude.

And,

you know,

they'll be the kind of people that will really enhance your job or your business.

And that's not true now.

And it's not just, I'm not just talking about affirmative action.

I'm talking about the general quality of the student.

And so

that's changing.

Let's say that you're very cynical and you're very rich and you say, you know what?

I don't really care.

I just got to get one of my grandkids branded.

So I give them 10, 20 million dollars a year.

And you know what the purpose is?

So they go to Harvard and they meet the right person.

They see somebody whose dad is working at Goldman Sachs or they see somebody whose mom is a neurosurgeon at Cedar Sinai or they see somebody who's a famous author.

that's why they do it that's how they think because I've talked to them that's not true in there anymore not when you you have these quotas it's not even going to be a place that you pay to network I'm not I don't agree with this I think it's silly and stupid but the people who give it a cattle brand of prestige do it for various reasons.

One is they want their kid to be certified and educated on the cursus and norm.

Another is they want them to marry somebody, right?

Yeah.

And now,

and then they want to be an alumni of a cutting-edge university.

But today,

and I'm just, again, talking about Stanford.

So what's happened since I've been there?

The president is under investigation for doctoring articles.

We produce the Bankman

Freed family.

We've got...

Carolyn Ellison, Caroline Ellison, the Alameda person.

We turned out Elizabeth Holmes.

We had scandals in the business school of sexual harassment.

We just published a list of words that made us the laughingstock in the United States.

It said words like American or racist, so is immigrant.

It was just an embarrassment.

We have posters that say,

you know, spray raid on

Shapiro.

Yeah, I mean,

it's all bad.

So when you see the name Stanford in the news, you don't see Stanford at the cutting edge of COVID research.

You see this.

Stanford suggests that the application of medical facilities for long COVID is

not symmetrical.

It's embedded with racism.

Or you see when you see maybe the

water problem, you might not see Stanford hydrologist finds a way to

store more water.

It's more Stanford

hydrologist finds that underprivileged communities are getting less water.

That's fine, but you're not doing what you used to make, what made you famous.

That is science and social policy that makes people richer and more successful as a country.

And so

they're not doing anything anymore.

And so what's happening, the Republicans are going to, is if they get the Senate, they're going to be in big trouble, the higher education.

They are now, but if...

Because they're going to go after the endowment.

They're going to tax the income.

They're going to go after tenure.

They're going to go after federal grants.

They're going to cut the federal grants unless they follow the Bill of Rights.

Because,

I mean,

if you're accused of sexual impropriety,

it's synonymous with a conviction.

You're not going to have the Bill of Rights, First or Fourth, or Fifth or Sixth Amendment.

So they're doing all this.

And there's no reason, what I'm getting at, Samba, why go there anymore?

If it's not a place to meet the right people, right as they define it, and you're not going to learn,

and you're not going to impress an employer,

and it doesn't have prestige anymore that you can brag about,

then

why go?

Why not just go to a place, University of Michigan,

UCLA?

You don't have to pay all the money, and it's so big and amorphous that the woke stuff doesn't quite take over it like it does.

And it's got some pop, I mean,

I have a, so that's one thing.

And Hillsdale College and St.

Thomas Aquinas College and the University of Dallas, the new University of Austin that's forming,

the one in Savannah

Ralston College, Stephen Black.

They're offering non-woke educational

alternatives, and they're getting swamped with applications.

They're all swamped.

Their only worry is, you talk to those people in traditional colleges, their only worry is, oh my God, we're getting all these people who who didn't get in to Stanford or Berkeley or

Yale or Princeton or Duke.

And they would have gotten in.

And

on the one hand, we like the idea that our SAT score pool is way up, our GPA is way up, but you know what?

They're all left-wing.

If we bring them into a traditional school, they're going to be, it's going to ruin

our character.

You know what I mean?

So that's the problem.

And then

we found out during the COVID, and we, as we talked about, the non-labor, non-participants, we've kind of ruined the work ethic in America.

We finished it off with the COVID payments to not work.

You've got people who are just, I see, I talk to people every day.

They're just paranoid.

They read, I just talked to somebody not too long ago, I should say email, and then

they see, oh my God, a million people are going to die of COVID in China.

It's going to come back again.

And they're not going out.

Or they don't go out or they don't want to work.

And then I know, you know, in my own frame of reference, maybe since I got COVID, long COVID, I must have had 10 people.

No, no, 20 people write me.

And it's always the same.

I've had this for eight, nine months.

I don't have any.

These are not crazy people.

These are hyper-workholics that were very successful and they can't go to work.

So my point is, we have a labor shortage, and they're paying astronomical prices for electricians, plumbers, and cement workers and roofers and

blacktoppers.

And it wasn't, you can go out.

There's no discussion about the minimum wage anymore, really, because what you can get in the free market is more than the minimum wage.

And so I guess what I'm saying is

half of America didn't go to college.

And now, in the last two years,

600,000 people dropped out of the college pool.

In the last 10 years, it's over almost 3 million have not participated in college.

That is going to be up to 60 or 70 percent very soon.

And you know what?

It's not going to be like we're illiterate because you have the internet.

You talked about what the alternatives, besides these traditional schools,

you can go on Hillsdale or Prager University or Jordan Peterson's university.

You can just find better instruction online.

And And you're going to say, well,

you missed the give and take and the excitement of a classroom experience in the campus.

Yes, but not if the guy is saying,

you know, the founding date of the United States is 1619.

And the story of America is one of racial oppression and hatred.

And,

you know, this is a capitalist, cool society downright.

If you hear that all day, why go to it?

Why not just get online with a classically liberal, wonderful teacher?

If that's what you really want is education, you can get the units, you can pay for the units online.

So there's, and

homeschooling is at all-time high.

Why send your kid and have,

you know,

you talk to every young woman who's got a daughter, you know, 12 or a son, 11, they're terrified because they're afraid they're going to come home and say, I've been told a transgender, you know, to transition.

So it's, or they're going to read books and all.

So there's all these centrifugal forces that are uniting.

And the result of it is

we're right in the middle of a revolution.

And these bourbons that are running the university don't realize that

the Bastille is being attacked.

And there's a revolution.

And people

are not, I know that Stanford had a record at poll, 44,000, but, and they only took 2% or 3%.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

But 15,000 administrators and 16,000 students, that's 15,000 people for a lot, in large part, are going to get in your business and bother you and monitor you and slow you down.

And that's what they are now.

Yale's the same way.

Yale's got about one administrator for every two faculty.

And

you keep telling, we'll get into that, but you keep telling white supremacy, white privilege, white supremacy, white privilege, and you keep doing that.

And

you alienate and ostracize and cancel out the entire working white class.

And

they're not going to be participating.

And you know what?

The same thing is happening in the military.

Yeah.

You keep saying

in a big way, huh?

Oh, yeah.

It's very funny.

The drop in college admission applications

is mirror imaging the number of shortfalls in the military recruitment.

And there's a common denominator.

People do not want to send their children to be indoctrinated.

They're not right-wing nuts.

They just, they want, they don't want to spend that money or they don't want their kid to risk his life.

If he's going to risk his life to go to a god-awful place in Afghanistan, they do not want him under suspicion of suffering white rage

and what to do about it.

And then you've got,

it doesn't have anything to rate with race or anything, but anytime you destroy merit,

if you're going to let people into medical school and they would not have been admitted five years ago, And you said five years ago these standards are absolutely critical, that's why we have them, because we're going to offer a level of instruction in surgery

and ophthalmology and cardiology that requires a lot of talent.

And we have to have a proven record of talent and hard work.

And we have to have this aptitude test.

And we'll let you in.

But once you get in, we're going to make the best doctors in the world.

That's what America did.

But if you get rid of that and you say that all these standards were racially biased or ethnically biased or gender biased or whatever bias you claim,

then you're not going to be able to offer that level of instruction.

And that's going to be apparent on the back end.

Yeah.

For everybody.

It's so sad.

And people have seen this before.

It's just what destroyed Russia, the commissar system, the ideology.

And

it's sad.

It destroyed Germany.

Anytime this ideology is over all-encompassing, it destroys it.

And it really goes after people.

And so,

you know, it goes after a people, a person like Scott Atlas or what people at Hoover, people at Stanford that I've come in contact to.

They make public enemies out of people.

And

I don't see, do you see people going for trade schools and that kind of thing over university education?

I mean, that would also be another indication.

They are.

Trade schools are booming.

And because

it's a win-win-win.

Number one, you're out.

You're not going to waste your...

The problem with college is that only half the people graduate in six years.

Half.

Because the tuition is so expensive and the loans are so burdensome.

They take six.

I mean, do you really want to waste your 20s?

You meet these kids that are 23, 24, and they're in their junior year and they're taking.

six units of environmental studies and three units of psych and for their minor and they're working at at Starbucks and they've got 90,000 in loans.

They're not going to get married.

They're not going to have kids.

They're not going to buy a home

versus, bam, you go into welding school and you become a master welder.

I mean a master welder in two years and you go out for 30 bucks an hour with no student loans and no lectures.

And then if you feel that

you're more academically inclined, then you come home and on weekends you watch, you know, college courses on the internet.

You find some you like, you sign up, you get college credit, pay just for what you get.

No administrative overhead, no woke propaganda, and you get your degree online if you want, if you want.

But then you start to say, well, maybe

what would I get with my degree if I was a high school teacher?

I would get my summers off and, you know, 30 weeks a year, maybe, but I'm making a lot more than a high school teacher.

So

it's changing.

And I don't think the universities see it.

They think they're so coveted that people have to be associated with this brand and they can do anything they want and they're smart and they just you want to tell them, you know, every once in a while you meet one of them and you just politely try to say, do you people realize you're going over the cliff at full speed with no brakes?

And it's happened very radically.

I had a good friend.

He was a very successful businessman.

He told me six years ago.

I I didn't know what he was meaning.

I didn't know what he meant.

And he said, he mentioned two blue chip universities.

He said, I don't care.

I don't care what they learn.

They don't learn anything, Victor.

He had a huge company, global company.

He's a multi-billionaire.

And he said, all I care is this, that to get into that university, they have this level, 97 percentile of the SAT, and they have to have a GPA.

And that tells me, A, they work really hard to get the GPA, and B, they have natural intelligence.

So they screened them out for me.

But I don't think, I don't hire people for what they learn at these universities.

They don't learn anything.

I will train them at my corporation, but I just want them to screen them.

And then I said, well, what happened if they don't?

Well, he said, if they drop those tests and these GPAs don't mean anything, then I don't want any of them.

And so we said that.

There you have it.

That's what that's they kill the golden goose.

Yeah.

So Harvard or Yale or Stanford could say we're attracting the hardest working,

most naturally aptitude

overachievers.

And we're going.

But if you're not doing that and you keep telling everybody that that was racist or unfair or biased, and then your product, your graduates go out in the real world.

And maybe I hope maybe they can do it.

But there's only one way it could work.

If they're letting people in that wouldn't have gotten in five years ago or three years ago, and their SAT scores are 250 points lower than the people who used to be admitted, and their GPAs are from schools that are not competitive, then they should have

a marshall plan their first year.

They should say, anybody.

that didn't do this score in the SAT, we're here to help you, and we're going to give you English composition immersion, and we're going to give you analytical instruction.

But if you think all of that's mean or unfair or stigmatizing, and they do, it's not going to happen.

So then what do you do?

Once you break a rule and

you can't prove that the rule was wrong,

then, and I mean, I don't think you could say that the universities were racist when 40% of

their applicants that were admitted and maybe 60 were Asian, right?

Yeah.

And so

once you break a rule, you have to keep breaking it and breaking it and breaking it and breaking.

You let somebody into a university that was not qualified, then you have to make courses so that the person can take them.

If the GPA is not there, then you have to lower the grades and then you have to graduate them.

Otherwise, it's

what's the point of letting somebody in that can't graduate?

Victor, let's...

Oh, go ahead.

No, I'm just saying, as I said earlier, graduation now is synonymous with admission.

Yeah, yeah, and that used to be because they were such high achievers, as you pointed out earlier, and had arrived there on merit.

Well, everybody knew that we're lazy when they worked like crazy at these prep schools and these blue chip public schools.

And then they got into Harvard or Yale and they thought it was a joke.

And then they knew that everybody got graduated.

Yeah, sure.

Well, let's take a moment

for some messages and then come right back and talk about

getting beyond the white rage that we have out there.

We'll be right back.

We're back, and I'd like to remind everybody that Victor has a website called The Blade of Perseus, and you can find it at victorhanson.com.

That's B-I-C-T-R-H-A-N-S-O-N.com.

Our flagship for these podcasts is John Solomon's Just the News.

And you can find the podcast on Just the News and lots of other things.

John Solomon is an investigative journalist, so lots of breaking news that comes off of his website, Just the News.

We want to look now, Victor, at the anti-white rhetoric going on in

everywhere, actually, but in the universities as well.

You wrote a piece called A Rendezvous with Rwanda, and I was wondering if if you could talk a little bit about that article and

the course that we're on with this angel.

I don't think that anybody understood that tribalism is pre-civilizational, and civilization was marked by people and say where constitutional government began in Greece, giving up their tribal affiliations.

to accept a new identity that was not predicated on ethnicity.

So in Attica, for example, there were sub-tribes of Athenians, and then under the reforms of Solon

and Cleisthenes, especially,

people

were mixed up.

And so that there was such a thing called an Athenian, even though you might have been from Salamis, or you might have been from Marathon.

or you might have been from Acarna, it didn't matter.

But that was a mark, and it was based on merit.

So why we are going back to this tribalism that we read about in Caesar's Gallic Wars or Xenophon's Anabasis or Tacitus' Germania, I don't know, but it doesn't end well, as we know from the former Yugoslavia or Rwanda, when people start to identify by their superficial appearance by their supposed racial.

So, we all knew that, and now we're doing this, but it's very illiberal.

It's not that civil rights movement where we're all going to be integrated and assimilated, intermarried, even

outside these formal universities, that's happening, which is good, but

it's being sabotaged by our elites that are trying to divide people up by race and for their own personal careers.

And so, one of the things that's happened is

there's a new rhetoric, and

it's predicated like this.

that as the so-called white population, because of immigration, goes from 90 to 80 to 70.

I think it's 67, maybe.

I don't know how you define that because so many people are intermarried.

But let's say that's what the universities and the race industry do, they define it, then

and you get more and more quote-unquote equity.

The rhetoric gets weirder.

And in the universities, you would think that people will say, well,

there are much more, it's much more diverse.

So it's much more,

it's much calmer.

No, it's the opposite.

You know, this

article I wrote, and I'm remembering it, but I mean, there was this video I watched by this Professor Cooper.

She was at Rutgers, and of course, she's, you know what they are, they are that espoused this venom.

She was a professor of women and gender and Africana studies, but she said, you know, we got to take these MFers out.

And she was talking about whiteness is going to have an end date.

And then that, I remembered, and I looked this up about this professor at Texas A ⁇ M.

He said, I want to talk about killing white people.

And then he said,

you know, for everybody to be equal, some white people are going to have to die.

And then you remember that Yale psychiatrist?

So I wrote an article and I went back and she said, you know, I get so angry sometimes.

I just have this idea in my head that if I had a revolver, I'd just shoot.

any white person I saw and I'd bury their body and I'd wipe my bloody hands and I'd be absolutely guiltless with it.

I mean, imagine that.

It was so,

and you think, wow, Victor, these are professors.

Well, yes, they are, but every bad idea starts in a faculty lounge and it does filter down.

Look at the view.

The view,

remember Barbara Walters started that?

And she was kind of a polite,

kind of like, I guess in the, you know, it was kind of like

meet the press, but women discussing politics.

It's not now.

It's just

they have that crazy sunny Haustin on.

I remember when she said that suburban, white suburban women, she went full Hitlerian imagery.

She said white suburban women voting for Republicans are like cockroaches, cockroaches going to raid.

And then, you know, Whoopi Goldberg, I remember her.

She was the highest paid actress in Hollywood for years.

Color purple, goat, remember, goat, all that.

She's had a wonderful life.

And she starts pontificating on the Holocaust.

And she says it's just an intermurial war between white people.

And

the Jews were white.

No, he didn't think they were white.

He didn't think they were human.

He thought they were subhuman.

Wunter mentioned.

There was a whole hatred.

And for her to say that and then apologize and then kind of wiggle out of her apologies.

And, you know,

it goes on and on.

This guy that's on, I guess he's on CNN all the time, Eli Mastalli, that Harvard lawyer, he's, you know, when he came out of COVID, he had that widely, you know, white people haven't improved.

I've been able to limit my exposure to them.

And it just goes on and on and on.

And you think it won't filter down, but at Berkeley, you know,

they have this

off-campus, semi-official dorm where they say white guests are not allowed.

White guests, that's against the Civil Rights Act.

And so it just goes on and on and on.

And

you can see it,

it has to manifest itself in two phenomena.

One is

if people feel that you're targeted for being white, then you're going to try to say you're not white, right, for career advantages, from the back.

So you've got the racial dozel and you've got, what, Elizabeth Warren.

But then on the other hand, if you keep saying these white-rage, terrible white people, but you don't see it in the real world,

and you've got too many oppressed and not enough oppressed, then you're going to have to go to the food, what, Duke Lacrosse, Juicy Smaller.

And that's what we're seeing.

And

it's, I don't know where it ends, but the article tries to warn people that there are so many contradictions about this because once you start identifying as a collective, I'm not Victor Hansen.

I am a white person.

And when I go to Walmart at 8 in the morning and it's 95% Mexican or Mexican-American, and I see a white person in the meet, I'm going to go over and say, How you doing?

I have nothing in common with that person any more than I do with a Mexican person, right?

But I do if you're going to go this route, the identity politics.

And then

if you're going to say white people are full of rage and white people are this and white, you see what I'm saying?

White, white, white,

then you suffer.

You suffer the good and the bad because no longer the individual doesn't exist.

So you say, hmm, okay, white people are Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas Edison, the Wright brothers.

And if you say black people, black people, black people, then you say, are we going to talk about double the representation of black people committing hate crimes?

And if you're right about white people being so dangerous and, you know, hateful, then we should see it statistically.

But when we look at violent crimes, 67% of the population is white, it's about 58%, 55% of violent crimes.

You look at hate crimes, should be 67% of the perpetrators are white, it's about 30, 35.

So you say, well, they're not violent by data.

They, that's the author of words, Sammy, they, because the individuals no longer exist.

You've destroyed the individual and made him part of the collective.

So if you're going to make the collective, you sink or swim with it.

And then you say, Okay, well,

white people, if they're not murderous, what are they?

Well, let's look at the suicide rate.

I bet they never commit suicide because they have all the, but you look at the suicide, they have the highest suicide rates of any group, higher than blacks, higher than except Native Americans.

It's almost the same.

It's astounding, it's about double.

And so, why are they

so?

What I'm getting at is

this is what the ultimate operation is: that

each

tribe is going to start talking about

their accomplishments, and each tribe is not going to talk about their

non-accomplishments, but they're in a trap because they

broke the protocol and said the individuals don't exist anymore.

So every good thing that happens reflects on the race, but not every bad thing.

And that's not tenable.

And so

you're gonna have each group then and you saw you know as I keep going back to the LA City Council how might

when they started going after

the black adopted person the gay person the white person the Oaxaca it was just full of hatred that it was our tribe our tribe is underrepresented our tribe gets this

and

We know in the in the modern world that Brazil doesn't work too well.

It's trying to do a multiracial democracy.

Either does India,

not like we used to do.

And

in history, you need a lot of power if you've got a multiracial society with different tribal interests, whether it's the Ottomans or the Soviet Union or the Roman Empire.

And

it's something that people,

you know, they don't even understand how they sound.

So we were told that blacks were underrepresented in the NFL,

and now they're overrepresented.

And I think that's good.

It's a merit-based system now.

But now we're after this injury, we were told that it's racist that black players are subject to violence inordinately in football.

Well, yes, if you're overrepresented, then more than 12% of the injuries are going to be black.

So is it good to be overrepresented and make $10 million

are underrepresented?

And if you're overrepresented in NBA or the post office or NFL,

that's okay because it's essential

to what?

The country.

So you have to have overrepresentation of one group, but it's not for medical school or for neurophysiology or for nuclear research.

If it's overrepresented in Asians, that's bad.

In other words, something that's not critical to the body politics is

football.

But something that is critical is nuclear research.

But we're saying in

nuclear research, you have to have a quota system that's anti-meritocratic, but not in football or not in basketball.

You see what I'm saying?

Yes, I do.

It doesn't make any sense.

It doesn't make any sense.

And so that's where we are and where it's headed is

it's not going to be good.

I see,

I hear Jory Reed, you know, she's always talking about cultural appropriations and everything.

And, you know, if a white woman has dreadlock, she's culturally appropriating.

And then she's got dyed blonde hair.

I think she looks great, fine, but she's culturally appropriating.

By her own words, yeah, yeah, by her own words.

By her own words.

And it's a stupid term to begin with.

So we have all of these contradictions and they're falling by its own weight.

And

mark my words that if somebody in the university does not say to people, if you say that you would like to kill people on the basis of their race,

then you have violated, I mean, because these people are masters of hate speech, but that's hate speech.

And if you're going on television and you say, I don't like this person, I don't want to see them anymore, or if you go on television and say,

this particular race voting for this particular candidate or party is like a bunch of bugs going to

raid.

And

there's no consequences based on the idea that you can't be racist because you're a marginalized person.

And this is all transpiring,

right, when we're intermarried and we have immigration.

and the whole colossus by its own weight can't be sustained.

So just to take one example, I mentioned in the article, if you say at UC Berkeley's off-campus dorm that this is a safety for people of color, we don't want white guests,

period, right?

Then you're going to have to employ what people have done through the centuries to enforce that.

Because there's going to be what?

There's going to be ambiguities.

So the South had

an answer.

It's one drop, one drop, 116th.

So if somebody walks into the dorm and you say, wait a minute,

you can't come in.

You're white.

And you say, nope, I've got my DNA right here.

I'm 116th African American or Latino.

Or what do you do if you're another talk about intersectionality?

You come in and you say, I'm gay and I'm in a wheelchair.

I'm disabled.

Are you going to not let me in just because I'm white?

So there's all these, I'm one quarter, I'm one eighth.

Are you going to let in the, I don't know, the blue-eyed, blonde-haired Argentinian that speaks fluent Spanish, that that has a very heavy Spanish influence accent, but whose great-grandparents came to Argentina from, let's say, Italy or Germany,

and you're going to let him in,

right?

And because he's what?

Latino?

Or is he white?

So what I'm getting at is it's just ridiculous.

And all these contradictions of past illiberal societies, whether it was yellow stars in the Nazi regime, or whether it was the one-drop rule in the old Confederacy, or it was this crazy racial labyrinth that the South Africans used of pure white,

mixed race, African, you know, and it doesn't work.

And yet we have all these people with PhDs that claim it's working.

Well, Victor, you actually end this article on a little bit of an up note, and I would like to read the last paragraph.

Yeah, please do.

I'm getting depressed just remembering, right?

But you wrote: the only method of avoiding a Rwanda-style chaos is simply to forget racial categories, preferences, and repertory actions entirely, and instead simply enforce the civil rights era anti-discrimination laws on the books that were supposed to protect everyone from everyone, but are now ignored and routinely violated by our own government.

But you do end on a partially upbeat in the sense sense that you provide a solution.

Yeah.

Solution's easier.

You just say race is irrelevant and it's incidental.

It's not essential who you are.

And we're going to let anybody in by,

you know, we're going to let people in by merit.

And if you feel there were inadequacies or unfairness, economic or such, in your childhood, we're going to have public facilities that are charter, and they're going to be math camps and English camps and analytical camps and they're going to be free.

And anybody in the inner city or anybody in the barrio or anybody in Appalachia who feels that

they want to have that opportunity, we will guarantee them.

And I did that at Cal State Fresno for 21 years.

I said, anybody who wants to go to the Ivy League or become a lawyer, a doctor, or a professor, I can guarantee you if you have the aptitude, and I will give you the education you did not get at Selma High School, Wheatley High School, Bakersfield, but you're going to have to work, and we're going to give you an MA, and that'll be worth a BA.

So you're going to learn Latin, you're going to learn Greek, you're going to be able to read French and German, you're going to be able to write in Latin, you're going to be better prepared than somebody who's an undergraduate at Yale or Harvard.

But you'll have to get an MA because I can't do that in four years.

And the ones did it, I think, as I boasted the other day, 50 of them over that period went into the Ivy League.

That's amazing.

They're professors all over the United States, they're lawyers, they're very successful.

And

I, it was just one rule: I don't want to hear what particular tribe you belong to.

I don't, I'm not interested in it.

And that went for white people too, you know.

And

so nice.

Well, Victor, we're at the end of our time here.

Thank you so much for all your words of wisdom.

I would like to remind your audience: you can be found on social media at Hansen's Morning Cup on Facebook and V D Hansen on Twitter.

Come join us.

There's also the Victor Davis Hansen Fan Club on

Facebook, but they are not part of, we're not associated with them, but they do an excellent job of pulling out all sorts of interviews and,

you know,

past writings, etc.,

that you've done, as well as the current stuff too.

So it's an interesting little fan club, and you can join that on Facebook, Victor Davis-Hansen Fan Club.

So, thanks again, Victor, and thanks to the audience.

Well, thanks, everybody, for listening, and we'll see you next time.

This is Sammy Wink and Victor Davis-Hansen, and we're signing off.