In the second of this week's COMMENTARY podcasts, we ask whether the president might be relaxing into his job—and whether this means he knows now that he doesn't have to fulfill every agenda item at once but can take them on over the course of the next four years. And then we delve into the horror on college campuses and the grudging acknowledgment by the mainstream media that things are bad for free speech there—which, of course, they blame in part on bad conservatives. Give a listen.
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
some guy. Welcome to the Commentary magazine podcast today is Thursday April twenty seventh, twenty seventeen, I'm John, towards the editor of commentary. Seventy you're, a monthly of Go analysis, cultural commentary, moral problem from a conservative perspective. Please join us a commentary magazine dot com where we give you a few free reads, and then we ask you to subscribe for one thousand nine hundred and ninety five, which gets you a digital or or twenty that ninety five gets you in all access subscription, including our beautiful monthly max.
In your mailbox eleven times a year with me. As always know, Rossman are associate editor. I know a high. An commentary senior editor, a red while high Abe. I John. So, gentlemen. The story that will not die will never die in part because people who wanted to die in part because we can allow allow I until we get to the bottom of it- is the question of the potential russian meddling in the twenties. Sixteen election and potential russian involvement in the Trump campaign, given renewed life today by the news that the twenty four day, tenured national security adviser, Michael Flynn, had been paid in contravention of guidance given him by the Pentagon following his retirement from is active duty generalship in twenty fourteen.
He was not to take money from a foreign government uninfected, so was paid apparently and through a pass out pass through or whatever you call it cut out pass through carve out. I can ever lower these terms. That was a that was sir, very not very well hidden payment secondary payment structure for Russia today, which is a state, run television that workin, Moscow. So there are now going to be investigations. Questions of Senator Ritual Windfall of Connecticut a person of very little moral probity himself nonetheless, has now said that Michael Flint should be prosecuted, and obviously this just keeps alive. The question of what on earth was going on inside the Trump campaign that he and fellow unregistered for an agent and paid crony of Putin,
Paul metaphor, were in such senior positions of influence for as no Rossman says the America. First president, Yet this is an especially strike, our new- I wrote about this, but the day after Flynn was tat to be an essay in a late November and his allegedly now some new details regarding his soul service to the to the turkish government where he was working in service to the airline governments interests. Apparently, Those were also linked to Russia through some of corporate interests there and also those these. T payments I d got, which is by the way, are to rationalize obey Kremlin funded network. It used to be a Russia today. Now it's just branded Rte, Russia. Nobody really noses Russia, today
But yet I mean we knew that he had accepted these payments. When I wrote about that and in late November, because he just wooden, he wouldn't go on the record and say whether he had received, compensation for air going on, then there were very frequently and be appearing at a very conspicuously at a dinner in which he sat at the table with let him your Putin celebrating the network's anniversary of terror. Its founding. So you know these questions were an especially nude. Anybody who ve been following this information. We knew Michael and had a problem with foreign interests. Send his association with them and yeah, I mean the to the extent that the Pentagon has now investigating this the Pentagon. The spectral general has been tasked with investigating this is good and very badly for MIKE Flynn, and it's a controversy that will stand this administration. I don't know how long it will. Let me well were boot talking about this in two or three years, but it's I'm gonna, be a problem for them for the route for at least the rest of this year. We know in some sense, if, if
The scandal that never dies, as John says, if, if it sort of lives on perhaps exclusively in Flynn or or flynn- and I don't know maybe Carter pager- who but, but if it's in other words, if it should have, if it five adviser tributary words days and then the good there's ceases to be, this overarching question about Trump and Russia that may sort of work for the administration in some Well, here's something that I I was very critical of this administration's approach to or the campaigns approach to russian issues. It was conspicuous the extent to which, Donald Trump was a aware of Russia's geopolitical interests and be deferential to them to the extent, but he's not,
Are you aware of or deferential to any other nations interests, but he was really keen on Russia, and that was bizarre, but soon I think we have to serve point out that, in an odd way, one of the litmus test for being on that now notorious list of twenty two foreign policy officials who were who were advising the Trump campaign, which was At least I think in April of twenty. Sixteen, to make the point that the term campaign was serious. It wasn't just a kind of fly by night operation with no grounding in foreign policy that one of the the litmus test was not being hostile to Russia. That which is weird it's like it's one thing it's one thing to say: we want to have a different policy and even to admire Putin. For his toughness or something like that. But it's another two to have as a kind of ticket to entry. Some
relative friendliness to this regime which, Y know, a lot of people can't get beyond. What's going on to speak to you know to wonder whether some on toward was happen. I will say, however, now that it does look much analyse much more innocuous, not harmless, but it more I guess, genuine and attempt to create some sort of work of Rushbrook reproach rapprochement. With Russia along the lines of the of the kind that brought about the pursuit and George W Bush pursued, because we haven't seen the quid pro quo. We expected to see some sort of a of withdrawal from of theatres in which were operating similar to our, where Russia is also operating like Syria. Where
sanctions relief, and we just haven't seen that sort of thing so that the notion that we in of conspiracy theories sore, really gonna, saying that this is just a russian front operation in the White House, and they don't have a lot of ground to stand on amending its combination. And I agree that it looks sort of more naive now than sinister. But I, but I think that actually we could be that sort on his part is it was naive. On the people who were surrounding together that, whereas prairie has whole manner for its part, there's no name rank ol man afforded right old nickel, rich political than sudden whole take money from anybody in he knew exactly who is take money from his own daughters. After all, those
you know, emails I got revealed say things like there may be blood on his hands his own daughter. So I I you know. I don't think that reckon that zoom nineteen, but I also think just a reverse field here for a minute, then, in all sorts of policy areas from Russia to this weird dance. Yesterday, where there was this announcement that the American might be preparing to withdraw from NAFTA, followed by and announced that we were not withdrawing from after that people are too impatient. You know Conseil revolutionise foreign policy by pulling at a nasty. Doesn't have to do it in April of two thousand seventeen he do it in December is like it finally occurred to him when he said, I think we'll do health care in September that he's gonna be present for four years this he was. Miss lead or he misled himself where they all misled each other in the notion that he had to act as though
Everything was a total crisis that needed to be dealt with the minute that he came into office. That doesn't mean that he can't pull out of article five of NATO? It doesn't mean that he can pull out of NAFTA doesn't mean that he can't do all kinds of things that we would be horrified by. He just Maybe has realised that he's got all the time in the world where some bad, thus later on. Let's review, though, that report about NAFTA was dropped and an linked to than the quote, unquote nationalist wing The administration was ethically so that we can Wednesday morning. There was yet as worth speaking that was yesterday morning Wednesday that these stories commanded multiple from multiple new sources, a b c, the New York Times,
I think CNN all said we're preparing to pull out of NAFTA. But if you remember it wasn't Donald Trump who came into his administration with a fire under him to get as much done as quickly as possible. It was Bannon and Stephen Miller and the people around him on that part of a particular wing of the of the administration. So it stands. That's what I'm saying raised reason that this isn't tromp necessarily, but that was possibly trumps hand being forced by a wing of this administration that perceives itself to be me out, but, as I say so, maybe trump one of the educational processes of the presidency is to convince him that guess he is actually president. He is going to be president until twenty twenty one at the very least and that he doesn't have to he doesn't have to act as though his pants are on fire are you know, or it you're that we're like the building? You know it has to be put. I understand that he ran saying we're in crisis of America's not great and we're gonna be great again, but the notion that that meant that, on the
Friday after his inaugural, he had to release a hasty and ill conceived executive order that created Kay also airports. At some point, if he is interested in Rome an orderly administration that gets things done, he has got to get these hysterics. He that's not his me that's what's interesting about obviously rages. He gives a rally any as a temper Damp Germany and he has tweets in this and that but part of his style is like talk define will make a deal. You know come on. Let's all we're all going to take a nice picture together. You know where I'm going golfing in MAR a Lago like he doesn't seem to be in a hurry and the people around them are in a hurry, and the question is: does he like that is? Is you know, there's an argument to be made that even what happened with NAFTA is
fine for him in this Ella. Well, nothing matters presidency, because the people who want us to pull out of NAFTA heard loud and clear that that get out there is some intend to look into pulling out of NAFTA, and then everybody else gets the ok we're not pulling out of NAFTA right now, but you know what needs to be renegotiated message and everyone's happy no other viewpoints can accuse who's. Not happy well, they're, not happy Eventually I mean, as you say, this, this wing of the parties responsible for the collapse of
the original YO on travel. We had another executive order that fail regarding sanctuary cities, because the language was too abroad the health care of debacle. I mean that fail, because the legislation was terrible, but also the abandoned was despatched to the hill ended a terrible job, and now we are facing the prospect of yet another executive order with another ban and finger print on it. Won't really go very far, most likely because Congress needs to be involved and people are suddenly discovering that all you know what NAFTA was recently negotiations are aware in Pii, Pii Pii stood Trade Promotion partnership, so transpacific partnership that that was the subject of every candidate in the twenty sixteen race running veto in the other direction,
So when you do the math on this thing, and unlike of EV at first the ban and wings thrilled by their their demonstrations of of sort of strong arm in Force- and it doesn't take long for them to look Rana, realize they ve lost ground as a result of it and- may just be yet another example of that. But you know in regards to the to the sort rush of course, John you're. Right than that, in the long term. The thing to do is to is touched. You know make good power you look ahead. You know pick pick your moments, but you know in and wage war intelligent where or make policy intelligently we find totally. But popular by its nature is obese that needs to be fed and if, if those people, wherever they are though, the populace, the ban wing and other people who support them with. More importantly, they need these quick. Sort of seemingly revolutionary changes to happen. Well, they may need them, but you know, as I say, having
foolish? It's always completely velvet self defeating. So so, if Europe, if you're trump- and you have a finely tuned sense of what's good for you and what is not good for you, if you decide that this attitude on this aspect This approach is bad for you, then you're gonna go in another direction, as I say, maybe it's good and bad for you in equal measure. Maybe it's ok He seems not to mind to speak out of both sides of his mouth. I agree with you, which is it's not his mean and all because he really likes to. I have observed, give self wigwam he'd never wants to russian data because he wants to be able to say no, that's not what I said no waiting It's happened. It's gonna be a different than that. You know he doesn't
he sort of hate him to commit to declare himself right. So I don't know I mean, but think about that I mean the weather. Populist nationalist wing is to extend the EU, can identify them and they all fit really well into that category. But I guess let us call them the all right for now the two very fringe or group that was behind drunk from minute one and expect this to be their moment. Where are they now the sanctuary? Cities? Ego is dead. The traveller yo is in limbo plainly that we don't know if it's dead, it was just stay by district judge. It was, it was devastated by this agenda. Let the logic is extremely sound. I agree that the logic sound. I also agree that that YO can be redrafted to make it sound or in other words, the notion that the executive branch does not, therefore, that the executive does not have a certain amount of leeway to withhold federal funds from localities and states which do x, Y Mozilla's, violation, well the legend
patient here is, is the is the National scary ACT of nineteen fifty two, which gives him primacy over emigrating over immigration enforcement, so they're saying we're not going to enforce the law? If does that mean that there is no, there is literally no ability that he has to use the you know his aunt appropriate funds you could withholding is not on appropriating by the way and there's a good there's. Complicated history, this I'm not I'm not saying that it's gonna go this I am saying that it's not an open and shut case in the other direction
and indeed this is something the whole thing, but the sanctuary- cities- businesses, it's all symbolic anyway- they don't do much of anything and and that, to the extent that a light has been shown or shine or whatever the proper turnover impossible word to to figure out the grammar up on the really shocking behaviour of these public officials who are who, who literally make announcements that they are that they are going, they are not only are they knock and enforce the law, but they are going to try to direct agencies in their own cities and towns to help people hide from federal justice
That is, you know, so, to the extent that they are being exposed at that will help the argument of the anti sanctuary cities, people, even if it doesn't change policy, as God knows how many people are actually helped. I mean it's not as though, by the way the racial ice can still stage arrayed in a sanctuary city me that they have to ask permission of the of the of the local mayor. I know a federal officials have asked the permission rate, a house when he's got a warrant from now from a federal judge. This does we will dont work for them, and I know I speak again as people know is economies as as a relative, liberal and immigration here that doesn't mean that the notion is that you have firm it if we support a policy of helping people a vague, the law, as a government helping people evade laws is extremely bad.
I think it's fair. That goes to the point that these people are sabotaging themselves, even if they have a very good cause. When it is actually one of these people know that those who are opposed the sanctuary of aid. But I'm saying people who are supporters of sanctuary cities are making are putting themselves in a very bad out. They have a very bad odor to begin with there, with whom with them that we think that the notion that rule of law is not being now. I know what I'm trying to say is that, to the extent that this becomes a matter of public awareness outside of Fox NEWS, there are a great many people who are not that political who will hear what is going on and say. I think that's right, I feel like they have. A much of the people were opposed a sanctuary. Cities have a much clearer argument, that's what honest be universally up, yet it no you're missing my point: that's exactly what I'm saying that their point is very clear and that
and the even if the the executive order fails. A lot of attention has now been cast on sanctuary cities that middle of the road voters now whereof that only Fox NEWS viewers knew about most people in a man had no idea what sanctuaries that these were, I would say until we know two weeks ago and this is the sort of thing that can push people's conscious it's a little bit- I don't know about you, don't know in the dark some of the Anti Sanctuary city people you're, not your grandmother. Never had this disorder polishing, something that otherwise it disaster from administration. I mean they get there They clearly goes beyond what is asked. I myself have because yet another executive order stayed in the court again according to whom, who will hold them accountable for this error, while there,
I certainly know that's right, so their own voters don't care who's going to hold them accountable, how much of their own voters they have. You yourself have made this argument. They don't have a majority. I know- but that's not as I'm saying if you can right on the sanctuary cities with- if if this becomes like a major public policy focus over the next four years, I would say it will be in that positive firm for Trump and not a negative. I don't think it's a sort of thing. I think it is madness on the part of liberals and leftist to be focusing on this. It is a very bad bad policy. I agree. I would only suggested. The administration looking incompetent, is never good for the administration. I'm not sure again. Think about this. For a second once the given that I want. I just wanna. I just want to hammer this point. If, if trump needs,
Have his based shored up throughout his administration, but cannot in fact affect policies that will be all that helpful to his base because in fact, they're not popular, or they can't be done. Word there wildly too expensive or their impractical, making paints as though he's going to do it and then having judges, knock it down or having Congress knock it down or whatever will convince the people who care about this, that his heart is in the right place and then he is with them, even if he can't get policy done. This is what happened with Reagan and the pro life movement. Didn't spend eight years probe, lifers loved Reagan. Reagan did not lift a finger to do anything on the pro life. Issue, including appointing basically approach choice. Judges is worth pointing to the Supreme Court, and that was why and it was still thinkable too
return Roby went hate that was only eight or nine years after Roby Way Outer pointed us exactly what Barack Obama did for six years, how much help it I get him in elections. Well, he won and he ended office. Six percent of the relevant budget member labour. Have I not going about Trump? I'm not talking about Congress right Republicans, I'm just talking about trumpet. But my related question is what happens if the wall? Doesn't he can't get them about to happen and in some burgeoning, for I think that the ethical question of Mexico, paying for it, is or is serve already mood. But but if there's no wall, I don't let isn't point to the existing laws and declare victory. As he's done with everything else, movement, the lizard there there's a war, he can say. Look, here's what's gonna happen, we're going to have this fantastic thing: it's partially a wall and its partially an electric high tech wall made up of drones and room. Increased enforcement
that and liberals will say: word Obama did this to a near. Just this see he's he's just he's whimpering out, but they want em, to wit, so who is hearing the New York Times golfing at Trump for not building the wall. Who is Gonna hold trump accountable for not building the wall. If, if the world doesn't get built. Who's running to his right on immigration- democratic right to his right, is there going to be a right wing? You know. Is that who's that lunatic from twenty twenty he can do whatever he wants a primordial ooze to run against Trump from the right in twenty twenty he can do whatever he wants. You now ineffectual is a really bad thing in a president, but that, but you know Brok Obama Literally, nothing done between twenty eleven and twenty sixteen, and he is, I say, from from his lights, in his view,
now he ended office. On a high note, I don't do we really think history is gonna, be all that kind of Rock Obama. Well, I mean, History has already been kinder to Donald Trump that anybody ever thought it would be because he became president. So you know where he goes from here. Certainly he does not show signs of the notion it turns out. I think this I think you can say that he would have that moment after the election, where he would say to himself. God want me to become president and I'm supposed to trance, be a transformational figure like Andrew Jackson, like in a whatever Bannon, was whispered in his ear, and he doesn't want to be that guy. He wants to be the guy who walks around moral law, go clapping everybody's back and having our own government to put the president.
You know, that's what he likes: that's what he won't. He likes having people in the walking them around the West Wing and showing them stuff. He likes the trappings as he defines them, and he I dont think particularly there's no sign that he wants to be a transformational president. He got very dirty happened. You know he is he's. One of the forty five, but you know it's done needed to choose, enough? I mean maybe he'll want to which more may be can achieve more. Maybe he cares about getting reelected and twenty twenty one, maybe twenty twenty. Maybe he doesn't. I mean we all of this is all of this remains to be seen, but I, the presumption that we are dealing with somebody who can look at the.
The leaders of the last couple of months and say: oh, my god, I gotta do this better, because you know I just feel like all these executive, which just terrible we have evidence from the president's own words reported third party that he's very unhappy without his administration has unfolded so far. He set him. If he would give himself a sea plus on messages. We have some measure, but that's it that's all. He cares about. Molly cares about it for messaging and how is perceived in the press is not happy with how things have turned I, who knows you, know what I even saying get myself a sea plus. I don't know I mean on say is he so unhappy with messaging? The chance by sir is still his press secretary. Rights premisses. Still chief of staff, Steve Batten wasn't fired gardening, hunger. There everyone still there except might fluent to be bounced because you know and Katy Macfarlane is apparently we're gonna be sent to New Zealand or somebody you fat. I mean
he's that acting like somebody. You know Bill Clinton's first, three months they were already making changes because they were panicked. He doesn't nobody wants to do with this presidency. It would appear, and so he's not. You know it's not too I'm. He does not coffee odor of somebody who is in a state of desperation a little. He was much more like that. During the campaign there seemed to be a high. He seemed to be in a state of high anxiety, the three hundred and twenty a dot m tweeting, the stuff Cassiar Con. You know the behaviour during the debates. All of that he was a person who we know was sort of didn't know what he was gonna do the next moment, and now, as I say, I think, maybe when he said look will do tax reform layer will do will do healthcare later will You know we do. We don't need funding for the Vienna Funding for the wall. In this you know
national resolution that will keep the government open. We'll do it later It will do alive and he may that's what we started out with this by my saying everyone, looks at him saying you know we're staying in NAFTA, nobody's be comfortable, that that is necessarily a administration, long decision. He could very easily walk out of it later when he feels comfortable citizenship. What are we doing now? Everything is too chaotic or something
The irony is if he wants to sort of switching to auto pilot now, that's what the bee establishment to the to the extent there is such a thing is. It facilitates mean that that's that's what it allows you to do is I think the problem with the with the way things are in Washington right now is that there is no stout. There is no auto pilot. There is no status quo, Republicans in the house and send it dont know what to do with their majorities. He doesn't quite know what policies to advance and he doesn't have the thick staffing necessary to execute complicated pivots on policy. It's like the whole issue with Korea. If we are actually in a serious effort to revisit our Korea policy, we have the existing defence department. You know bureaucracy on Korea, we have the existing say. You know people on Korea. We have, whoever is in the
they department who handle this before. We can presume that none of them is a particular revolutionary where this is concerned, and that, if changes in policy need to be effective, they need to be affected by personnel who are going to turn the ship around and change the way it works. And he doesn't have those people and. Note there seems to be no particularly desperate sense of this. I was somewhere the other day and somebody pointed out he fired the. U S attorneys. Ninety two yours attorneys right, fired Hasn't nominated a single replacement. What what does that mean? That means that who do you think is their running. The offices demo Craddock. You know, number tools in these offices who all worked for Brok Obama Freight Year, so that sort of undercuts your point about. We shouldn't be too complacent here because, as you said earlier, staffing in the West Wing hasn't changed, people are being out made people rise and fall, but they don't leave, and so, if wherein, if that's all
pilot were there. Well, I'm saying you can't be autopilot, because now what I mean is auto pilot. Hence on the notion, in some sense that there is a prevailing consensus on policy that isn't just and Tropic right that that that, as I say, nobody knows what to do. That's part of the issue, so you can, have a kind of and tropic continuation of policy which is like what's happening with Obamacare which by them It makes no sense right because you can have a if, if your policy toward Obamacare is enter its law for the foreseeable future and that's where is the disease pastor that starts beginning in the next fiscal year in October, when you know that five more of the insurance companies pull out of five more states and the and the people find out that they're in in the in Obamacare that there that there,
the rates, are going to go up twenty seven percent and outside Obamacare they're, going to go up twenty two percent, because the insurance companies don't know what the net effect is going to be up the changes and all the other policies you can't just be in but you know change will happen that you are responding to if that makes any sense. Okay. So the other big thing that is going on is the increasing attention that is being paid now because of the second cancellation in this case. By am culture of a speech by M culture at the University of California, Berkeley and finally, attention on the part of mainstreaming has been paid to the rise in liberal fascism, on college campuses, the suppression of than the violent suppression of speech by people.
With whom people on campuses disagree what's interesting about. This, of course, is that, while everyone is now writing about this, there is some desperate effort to make it as though this is just another partisan. He said she said story and we, liberal say this and conservative say that, like some people want to suppress concerns, reach which can serve as are being awfully provocative with the speech that they want to give in to con college campuses, and you know what about the safety of kids unkind, cameras. What about the way they feel- and it's not fair to the extent The chancellor vigorously California, Berkeley, who I wish to point out, is a public official that is a state school. That's, not a private institution list early, says in peace and the New York Times today. If I can find it because it seems to have disappeared on me, I'm sorry, but keep basically says
we haven't done a good job as we should I'm college campuses of protecting freedom of speech, but you know that our right suddenly cares about speech. When did they care about speech before the far right? That's who were they to talk about speech? This is a guy who is a public employ he of the State of California Nicholas Turks, and here is the quote alone. I agree. He says that inquiry on college campuses is not always as open as it should be, and I We would also suggest that we need to be better at teaching the principles in history of jurisprudence around the first amendment, not the first time by the way, which says history of jurisprudence, and I was there Congress shall make no law respecting the Frio Sweet right, but the use of force has entered the discourse around the first amendment. If you want to see Five hours interpreted that phrase
a discourse around the first moment in an alarming way, the university has been accused of not responding aggressively enough against our own students. And the institution must now invest more public tax dollars in equipping campus police forces to subdue campus protests, even though The perpetrators of violence have been groups with no campus filiation, so What are you saying here is like, like fashion, american fascist of old, like less dramatic of Georgia, others it's outside agitators or coming in disturbing our peace here on the capital. You were cavalry not fair, because we have to spend money on it and you know where's the Oversee has been accused of not responding aggressively enough against our own students. Well a but you said something funny about this. Like. Who exactly is the university supposed to respond aggressively too in efforts to shut down freedom of speech on campuses, yet air.
The cleaning crew the cleaning. Ladies, you know the people drive the buses around Berkeley right and the end they. They certainly have no sanction to to respond aggressively to someone outside the university yeah I mean That's that this is bad as their dominion. Okay, I'm going to read you one final sentence and then I'm going to we're going to pause for fifteen seconds and say a thing. While you attempt to make sense out of the sentence that I'm reading and its total non sequitur horror a ready member. This is the chancellor of the union. Firstly of California, Berkeley quote: freeze It may be the new Clarion call of the far right, but the real subtext of those who try to disrupt institutions built on principles openness and inclusion with violence is on. Barely disguised end quote. These are there to clauses in the sentence, neither which has anything to do with the other. This, in
Of this notion that the right doesn't care is now only now cares about free. The far right only now cares about free speech, but that the sub of those is only barely disguised. The two have nothing, to do with each other. The sky is a you know, I don't know who that is at stake, for that quote: distills the amount of projection that there has been in the left's reluctant being forced drug by the nose into covering something that Republicans and conservatives have been covering four years. The increasing tension between people have been invited to speak of conservative views and students, refuse to let those views we heard it's been bordering on violent. For a long time we ve been seeing with its been predicted that there would be violence, because people like me predicted it alot of people who think that if we were talking about had there been no intellectual foundations have been laid for violence for over a year. Now, more than that, and then we have the notion that was being
settled by people like like, for example, MSNBC host Chris Hayes who's, a really sharp guy and doesn't it this doesn't behoove him he's see, says things like, and I'm quoting here too, if you haven't been paying attention to the right wing media We ask it's amazing emphasis, amazing, how much attention current camp controversies cut a campus controversies have gotten. The reason, I think, is that the right now controlled, most state houses in three branches of governments. They have tons of power, but modern conservatism. Emotional fuel is grievance and persecution, so they need to focus on camp as well guess what people are being heard. These words do not worry aside the island leave besides, that is every possibility to book. Every person in the meritocratic a lead in the United States has gone to college. Everybody has a stake in college. Everyone has kids, they're gonna, try to send to college idea that I think in the pages of
commentary and other publications like Mass Review in the weekly standard and others. If you were to go back and What is one consistent theme that has been hit on in these pages since the nineteenth seventies. It is the increasing closure of access intellectual exposure to friendly as to job four and the right eating of people who are not of the left on campuses, proof, professors the entire world. The entire world of the conservative think tank a I Cato the Manhattan Institute, the clear it up. Chairman into their various places, Hoover institutional lot of these in the horizontal college campuses. These are people who ended up with
becoming scholars at these places, because they were not welcome major major thinkers with Phds. You know we'd gone through rigorous training at Doha. Harvard and gale in places like that who were not who were made unwell. Come on college campuses were denied ten year for political reasons who were denied in a word. Denied acts eat out of a job. Turn these for ideological reasons, and this notion that dissolve new and fresh is insanely if it's either illiterate or just deeply offensive and besides which, besides, which part of the problem here, is that you think we want to sit here and have r r. Issues represented by Milo Monopolise and am culture. Thank you very and Richard Spencer. People like that, thank you, know well, yet will ten years ago. No, we were saying the other earlier before them. The public has started. It was candy rice who
being shouted down, it was built crystal who was being Bilbil castle by the way, was a Phd from Harvard and taught at the Kelly's will government who was here pies thrown in his face in Indiana end universally. You know it was. It was their protests against conserving speakers on college have been going on. Or thirty forty years, and they are getting increasingly worse. And now you have these kind of in a Fox news, baby, kids of them. You know, work conservative clubs and republican clubs campuses and what they love these disruptors like Milo and an culture who were I would it would I would I don't want to get him the pie in the face. But you know that's not me whose whose getting invited to speak at this waste is its these in a sort of like wilful
marketers without extremely bad taste and bad odor. The problem is that in most free speech cases over the over the centuries, it is unattractive people who have to be the people who are defended on speech. Those important free speech case of the last forty years But the was the case because whether or not hustler had the right to make fun of Jerry or Hustler or porn magazine, Larry, Flint the publisher, of hustler, really disgusting, foul human being, but but fall well soon, hustler, because they showed him and demeaning light and the whole question whether or not so a tire was a protoplasm free deserve the protection of free speech, protection of the first amendment, that's how it happens. That's how speeches defended, often and so get out too bad. So silly
four times as Jeremy Peters or people like that want to go into a whole thing about. Well, you know on the one side, its people, the other super. Freedom speech, but on the other hand, its em Walter, as though it's ok, suppress, am culture. What Peters wrote was conservatives are putting themselves and volatile situations on college campuses, how dare they there just there to start yet but there, but, as I say that goes back to that, goes back to nineteen sixties, right wing fascism in the United States, less dramatics George walls People like that who said you don't have any right to come into my state and outside agitate. Everything was Just fine until you outside agitators came along well that's not the way America works, maybe may end up being the way America works, because. So, for I don't see any sign that were winning this battle, but you know I mean I think, there's the lip progressives tend to think that if they can paint any issue
As being a right wing preoccupation, it will look easy for everyone and they can stay, can sort of label, it away. That's a tough that's, a tough on with free speech. Woman things are being destroyed. You literally have people being hurt on campuses, professor is being assaulted, re property being destroyed, only a couple of cases that only a few can be real. What you just said, borders are hawaiian. Do you know about that will happen in Berkeley Campus when Milo was with all gave us again. Nobody we support, but on the other hand, something that you dont burned down buildings over, and this is also something that's migrating from campuses onto just general political discourse. Everybody remembers what happens on it. What happened on Inauguration Day, Washington was was disrupted by people who are destroying shop windows
setting things on fire selling cars on fire, we'll Conor, freezers, dearth of the Atlantic tells a story yesterday. There today in the Atlantic about a parade so have we are per annum, quite understand it in Portland Oregon that had to be Hansel, nobody had to be cancelled because a an end for our group, anonymous anti fascist as they call themselves on Facebook, threatened violence against people who had the right to serve in the pray that site eighty seven, who were these people? It was labeled Noma, County Republican Party Buzz and Richard Spencer. It wasn't. It was the Republican Party of the county and there we are and so that the entire parade adds we cancelled because they were threatened with violence by law,
the wing agitators who wouldn't say who they were and they set out we're not we're not giving up. Arse are slot or place big in we're, not gonna with you. You can't you can you know you can't suppress us like this. Extremely revealing in this moment to see who, on the left, who would identifies as a Democrat is unreservedly and without qualification, saying that this is wrong. That not There is no point to be made here that will actually maybe there are both sides to this issue, and there are a lot of Democrats or jumping out in front of this thing. And there are a lot of Democrats who art- let's not forget, Howard Dean's tweet, right here, who has been in a quagmire, this Vietnam, trying to defend himself raising these activities. Harnish aid speech: you said something like sorry models, Donald Speeches, recent speeches not protected by in the county right free, speech does not include hate speech. I was I just more than sitting on tear. I know every chance give any keeps citing Supreme Court false.
Falsely have any someone courtship Linsky, the famous chip, Linsky decision that suddenly now everybody is. It is aware of, but of course, that the truth is it's not that hate speech is or is not protected. The only kind of speech that is not protected or is considered not speech are direct threats, threats or you know, you're not allowed to got somebody and make a speech and say I you should all go, kill, em culture, that that is not permissible You cannot incite violence and you cannot yourself yeah, but you say and cultures disgusting. Yes, you can say and cultures disgusting that is legitimate, but you can't say I'm culture should be killed. That is not what I think the misreading of Chaplin's gaze, that fighting words clause at the. If you did, they personally perceive people who believe this to be the result of this decision is, if you perceive yourself to have been incited, it amounts to incitement to violence and others
not it's really really hard to prove and a court that you ve been cited. Someone to violence, many have tried, and many have failed right anyway, besides which its it was weird decision. It was a decision of nineteen. Forty two was the middle of the war you know what Middle World war to a whole thing? It's not you know, did not press. It is not entirely presidential. No one has ever you immense, barely ever been used as a precedent for anything anyway. So far, LISA. What we're saying here is the liberals are now paying attention to the suppression of free speech, but they dont. Why isn't there well, but they don't want to and their end and a lot of this is it ok go back to sleep, it's just had called her and then, of course, there is the pastor dissimilar example right. The pass your email example is first, came for an culture and I didn't say anything and then they came for me and as I tweeted today that is, that is our dear friend Mr Rum. You know Mister kara!
Nicholas Starks of University. So when they come for him, who is going to speak for him? Nobody and they will come for him because they come for them. You know they. Inevitably they come for the cool locks and the bourgeois defenders of the prior regime when the totality- answer on the March there, not they're, not satisfied with the aim of which is about the edges, have to put it in an enormous piece of hypocrisy here. What was wanted Big overarching fears of the trunk presidency on the left was was was asked as the suppression of speechwriter that that that that that he would, he was going to whose comic using the crackdown on the press and that he was gonna go out miles. We dies in darkness exactly right. Every new slogan of thee, Jeff, bees, ozone, Washington Pereira, democracy, doesn't darkness trump himself? You know what triggered this a little bit by saying, he wanted to say that we wanted libel laws to be resident to make it easier for him to sue people who are nasty to him Wichita
doesn't even go to this point because we are talking about whether or not someone's allowed to sue someone for being nasty. The somebody else it's about whether or not you are allowed in the play, in the world that is supposed to be committed to the fore. The expression and exploration of ideas without fear or favour. That's not the press, that's the university, where it has become unacceptable for anybody to express views outside of a tiny little we now framework on Chomsky on the left, Slav, oh she's, back on the right and a very lucrative all this is that it's not as though this this student movement of violence sprung. Fourth ex nihilo. This is something that is supported by faculty by members of the of the elite left to teach on these campuses, who have a soft spot. First, somebody like Melissa Click, the almost a click right. So that's that's a good way to em Melissa. Click was the professor in these, so
the out journalism, we're sociologist Communications Department at the University of Missouri, who you may during a protest of the incoming president of It was a kind of black lives matter. Black lives matter matter, basically, said what did she say most we need we need muscle. Somebody was about a graphic. This protest. She had objected to it. She tried to get this person to just to destroy those persons camera they persisted, and she requested quota quote muscle to to stop the photography of a protest on state owned grounds, which you can't do what you have said and as a communications professor and opens up some ethics in well, you know if Europe, if your bar, you can get the gun, are constantly site, but you can, if someone takes your car, you get the yea beauty, you get your goons to go. Take. It
Get out smash your camera, we end or take the film out. So you know that that's that's the mafia, that's not the american College campuses, it is and that's why I don't want to send my kids to college and would rather that they go. I don't know where the You know what that is certainly the case, but it should be said that there is Minos. There are liberal art, school, small, liberal schools that are really welcoming and accepting of free speech, and it's actually. I think this is probably not the rule that we're talking about it's more like the exception, but is becoming less and less the exception every day and that's what the problem is. We don't know what it's hard to say. What's the rule must exception, because the question is whether whether the boundaries are tested are not good. Be that just because there's just because we don't hear about what it what life is like Yon, some, you know the college, some small liberal arts school in Missouri doesn't mean that they ve hired a conservative professor and
four years or that the conservative student group isn't you now given an office of fifth, the size of the US politically speaking, about violent impulse Alcott, while russian is obviously violent impulses, are they were the reason this is like, broken windows theory, though I mean, if you don't, suppress violent uprisings at universities against speakers. You'll get a hundred of them. You know about that. That's that's the that's the nature of disorder! If you don't if If you give into disorder, you get more of it. If you challenge it, you get less, that's you know, you're not interesting about this is a democratic leaders are not with the students in the college campuses on this Oh, I don't know that. While I mean I am thinking of Obama right whose whose you know biodiversity say right, Bernie Sanders right, but. Oh here, in New York, the world
College in the city university system has now basically given an honorary degree and asked the commencement speaker is one when the SAR Sir, a virulent anti semite, who was one of the organizers of the women's DEC Anti Trump women's March now that she has been invited, she must, it must be continue Emmy. I would be at this moment it would be of horror if she were DIS invited because she expresses views that are that are noxious. But having said that, like I don't see the city council. I don't see you now Melissa Mark of every, though the head of the City Council loves, Linda sorcerer, saying this is terrible you now. This is what you stuff like that. So it's not so not so simple.
The closer you get you now where's, the mayor Berkeley was the Mayor Berkeley, saying in outline again, not aside a movie too much, but like the Mafia mayor in National champions, animal health like you know, closed down that zoo fraternity of yours? Why is the mayor? Berkeley, saying: why are you doing this? To me, because they're all because there on the same side, that's why every time we are on your side, we commentary and your site. That's why we do this. That's why we do this podcasting. We ask you subscribe, that's going to come to a magazine, dot, com, few free reads that we asked subscribe. Do it please do it, we need you, love you. You know, you think we do us for our health believe me we're not doing it for our health at work where were reasonably healthy. I think that's me, and our love for you so for
green, wild Andorra. When I'm John put keep the candle burning.
Transcript generated on 2020-02-26.