On Friday’s Mark Levin Show, who do the Democrat party represent and stand for in America? They put the party first and the country and citizens second, because the party is how they get and retain power. Regulations and attacks on energy independence is succeeding in destroying our country, while the DOJ and FBI impact the country in other ways. We almost have one-party rule today in the United States with some Republican quislings aiding the Democrat Marxists. Individualism is now replaced with groupism being taught in Critical Race Theory, which refuses to view people as individual human beings but rather as groups of people and condemn them for things they have not done in the name of equity. That is the totalitarian Federal government and the Democrat party today, who do not believe in individualism but instead, view people in classes like Karl Marx. Thankfully we have someone like Governor Ron DeSantis in a powerful position to take on the woke Democrat agenda and protect schools and children from being indoctrinated. Disney is suing DeSantis while other conservatives like Nikki Haley are selling out to the woke mob. Also, Mark speaks with KY Attorney General Daniel Cameron about running for governor of Kentucky and hits back against a racist cartoonist in a local newspaper.
Quilette
Uncomfortable History
Right Scoop
Kevin McCarthy calls on Gov. DeSantis to end his ‘feud’ with Disney
Red State
Florida Scores Huge Win for Free and Fair Elections Over Marc Elias and an Obama Judge
Photo by Celal Gunes/Anadolu Agency
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Rough transcription of Hour 1
Segment 1
You know, as I spend really almost all my available free time working on this next project, one in the morning. But typically early in the morning, I come across things, so many things I want to share with you. And so I want to share some of them with you now. It’s Friday. We keep the foot on the gas pedal. I’ve told you in the past about a man, the late Raymond Iran, and he was a journalist, but more than that, a philosopher. He’s French or was. And he wrote a fantastic book called Democracy and Totalitarianism A Theory of Political Systems. And. He wrote something here that I want to read to you. We have a lot to do today, so we’re going to do it a lot. But I try to do more than a lot. I try to do what’s compelling and intriguing and helps explain the world we live in today. Let me read this to you. The corruption. First of all, he says the degrees of corruption can be distinguished. By their main cause. This is to be found either in the political institutions, in the narrow sense of the word or in the social infrastructure. The corruption of political institutions appears when the party system no longer corresponds to the different groups of interests. Or rather, when the party system works in such a way that no stable authority emerges from the rivalry of the parties. So let’s slow down a second. Who exactly does the Democrat Party today represent? The people don’t want open borders. They don’t want to double, triple the cost of electricity. They want affordable gasoline and affordable and available groceries. They don’t want to be told what kind of automobiles to drive. So exactly who does that party represent? They might say people keep voting for, which is true. And that’s it’s a complex issue. There’s a lot of reasons for. But let’s stick to this first. The second kind of corruption is that of the public spirit. Montesquieu, who was very important during the constitutional period, and he lived in the 15 and 1600s and he’s quoted in the Federalist Papers. He was the gentleman who who most well articulated the idea of separation of powers with the judicial, executive and legislative. The second kind of corruption is out of the public spirit. Montesquieu called this the corruption of principle. Different modalities of corruption of principle can be imagined. Either devotion to the party obliterates, in the end the awareness of the common good. And you can see that. And I’ve talked about this for years. Now, the Democrat Party in many ways is like the Communist Party, and those who lead the Democrat Party are in many ways like people who lead the Communist Party to the party first. And the country second and everything else second, your allegiances to the party. Because the party is. The way in which you get power. Either devotion to the party obliterates, in the end the awareness of the common good, or else the spirit of compromise, which is a necessity if the regime is to work, ends by preventing any clear decision from being made in any firm policy from being embarked upon. That sure as hell sounds like today, doesn’t it, Mr. Producer? Lastly, writes Freeman, Iran corruption can originate from the social infrastructure when the industrial society is no longer able to work. When social rivalry becomes so intense that the political power emerging from the parties is unable to dominate them. I’ll think about that. When the industrial society is no longer able to work. We see with the regulations and the attacks, energy independence and all the rest. A war on capitalism, a.k.a. a war on our industrial society, is succeeding in destroying the country. Constitutional pluralism or I should say constitutional plural. Pluralistic regimes, he says, can be corrupted. By too much oligarchy or too much democracy. That’s why we’re a constitutional republic. I don’t buy the populism crap and I don’t buy the centralization of government crap. The first Cape case, they become corrupt because a minority manipulates the institutions and prevents them from reaching their highest form, which is government by the people. The second kind of corruption appears. On the other hand, when oligarchy is too eroded and the different groups push their claims too far. And no authority able to safeguard the general interest remains. Think about that. He also talks about. The establishment of laws within which rivalry of individuals, of groups and of parties takes place. Every violation of the law by force is a breach in the very existence and essence of the regime. So in other words, you can see what’s happening with the Department of Justice and the FBI. And how that’s impacting the country. So I find this gentleman to be incredibly intelligent. And unfortunately, he’s known in in Phyllis circles, philosophers, philosophical circles. He’s not known generally. The 20th century. There are authoritarian regimes which are not one party regimes. And there are one party regimes which do not become totalitarian, which do not develop an official ideology and which do not shape all their activities through ideology. There exist one party regimes which the state does not absorb the society and in which ideology does not take this insane expansion, which can be seen in the Soviet regime. As he wrote, a few decades passed. What is true is that everyone, party regime and industrial societies brings with it. The risk of totalitarianism. The Democrat Party is attempting to make America a one party regime by putting the Republican Party out of business. H.R. one in the last Congress, ladies and gentlemen, was pushed for the purpose of destroying for all time the ability of the Republican Party to win elections. Packing the Supreme Court, packing the Senate with four more senators, all Democrats from Puerto Rico and the D.C. area if they got their way. And other. Changes that the Democrats intended to do. The voting system would ensure one party rule. We almost have one party rule today. Not quite. Not quite. The Republicans aren’t Marxists. They’re more quisling than Marxists. Mr. Producer, You know, Quisling was Mr. Producer Google. It looked that up. So the Republicans not all, of course, but they’re more excuse me, the more quislings than Marxists. The Democrats are Marxists. People are afraid to say these things. They shouldn’t be afraid to say these things because we can’t defeat them if we keep all the Democrats, all the progressives, all the liberals, They’re not liberal. They’re not liberal. They’re radicals. To be liberal is not to be a radical. It is possible to understand not the Great Purge itself should combat Marxism or the terrorism directed against the member of the party. But the possibility of these phenomena, by starting with the technique of Communist action when a party gives itself the right to use force against all its enemies in a country in which to start with, it is in a minority, it condemns itself to perpetual violence. Now you can take violence out of their. And talk about where adjusted to what’s going on in our country today when a party uses all government instrumentalities. The FBI, intelligence agencies, Department of Justice, the Environmental Protection Agency, when it uses all aspects of government instrumentalities to empower itself and destroy all challenges, it leads to violence. One party police state. That’s what he’s saying there. Again, the book is Democracy and Totalitarianism A Theory of Political Systems. I’ll be right back.
Segment 2
There’s a website, Colette that came a very good one. And there’s a piece there. Uncomfortable History by Christopher J. Ferguson. And what he is doing is he reviews a book called Indigenous Continent by Pico Hamiltonian. It’s a long book. Grappling with Western misdeeds does not require us. To turn indigenous tribes into pious exemplars of moral instruction. And I want to get into this after the break, sir. What he’s saying, what the author of the book is saying and what I am saying is this these endless, obsessive, vicious attacks on American history. Which has the majority or the founders or the framers or whomever the boogeymen are. As the worst of the worst human beings to ever live on the face of the earth. Ignores the history and culture. The history and culture of other people on the face of the earth. Because it doesn’t serve the purposes of the present day political narrative. And on this particular book, it’s a very extensive book. It talks about the early culture during the 1800s and so forth of the Native Americans in America. The brutality, the misdeeds and so forth, rather than a utopian narrative. Other books have been written about how horrendous black tribes in Africa were and still are. In the torture, the treatment of women. The. Slave men of other blacks and ultimately the sale of blacks to others. None of this is ever discussed. Certainly not in the classroom. You can’t even discuss a colorblind society because it does not fit the narrative of critical race theory. It does not fit the narrative of the hate on for American history and America. But real history. Of people. Real history. And the early history of this country and other countries has a different story. So if the New York Times were a legitimate outlet for information, you wouldn’t have the 1619 project. You’d have a project talking about what was taking place in the continent of Africa or what was taking place in the various tribes, as well as what was taking place. With the Europeans and others. Who came to what became known as the United States. But we don’t have that. We don’t have it. This is very, very problematic. So Christopher Ferguson reviewing this book. Uncomfortable History, says the Freudian concept known as reaction formation, refers to a psychological defense mechanism against guilt. It occurs when an individual responds to a shame inducing instinct with an overcorrection. Much of modern American history appears to be in the grip of reaction formation. Mortification at the developed West’s historical misdeeds has produced a utopian narrative of indigenous worlds, typified by matriarchy cooperation, pacifism and gender fluidity that no such world ever existed as beside the point. Much of history is narrated to suit the proclivities of the audience, not to tell the truth about what actually happened. That is what’s going on in our classrooms today. That is what’s going on in the media today. This seems to be specifically true for our understanding of American Indian history. The violent migration of Europeans to the New World was very much like violent migrations throughout history and across cultures, most likely including successive waves of North American Indians. Through the history there is marked murky. And instead of understanding these events in the context of larger historical patterns, the Indian wars are cast as a morality tale in the manner of Howard Zinn, in which the actions of European settlers are represented as uniquely reprehensible. This fantasy may be an inversion of past jingoistic and racist caricatures of American Indians as savages, but it is not more historically accurate. He says. I thought about this a lot as I read Peker how millennium’s fascinating and controversial in the history of Northern American Indians indigenous continent told largely from the perspective of the natives. Hamiltonian covers the centuries from the arrival of Europeans in North America through to the final subjugation of the last tribes in the late 19th century. It’s a gripping history, but watching the author attempt to come to terms with the history he’s telling also makes for a fascinating psychological analysis. I want to pick up at this point after the bottom of the hour, again, this relates to what’s going on in our country today in our classrooms. I’ll be right back.
Segment 3
I’m going to get into a number of the issues that are out there today, so just hang with me. But I’m trying to lay the foundation for things that are going on in this country. And so you can think about how much history is not taught to our children, how much history was not taught to you or me. Now my case, I go out and learn it on my own and I try and convey it to you. And so let me pick up where I left off with Christopher Ferguson at the quill at site, looking at indigenous Continent, a national bestseller, because I suspect nobody’s ever heard of any of this. Although the word captive makes a lot of appearances in the book. It is selectively employed when Europeans take people unwillingly to harsh work environments or to be sold to others. The victims are all called slaves. But when American Indians do the same thing, how Malaysian euphemistically describes those victims as captives. In fact, a number of tribes were energetic participants in the trade of other indigenous people selling slaves to other tribes in the Europeans. Although a Hamiltonian shows an admirable willingness to discuss such practices whose discomfort is palpable, rather than revealing the cultural chasm or schism between indigenous people and Europeans. The historical record teaches us just how similar they were. Each vied for status and power, kept slaves engaged in genocide against neighboring groups, mistreated women, indulged ethnocentrism, and so on. Tribes or confederation, such as the Iroquois, Sioux or Comanche, were violent warrior cultures that recall the Spartans. This observation isn’t intended to denigrate Native Americans. It’s simply evidence of our shared a profoundly flawed humanity. What Europeans did to American Indians was often terrible. But Indians gave as good as they got both the Europeans and each other. These stories are similar to those the world over who are equally capable of great horrors and cruelty. And the history provides few examples. A morally unambiguous hero’s embracing the universalist truths can help us to move past the morality tale so often told in the guise of history, and discard a misbegotten and ultimately selfish indulgence and self flagellation. This has always been the problem with Howard Zinn School of History. These radical leftists since history, the US resembles a biography written by a bitter former spouse. In lieu of a nuanced and accurate historical account, It offers a deliberate slander of our own culture, and so does critical race theory. The result is at once self-indulgent and self-pitying. A balanced account must not flinch from examining our historical mistakes and misdeeds and those of others. But the modern approach to history is too often become a neurotic, wallowing in half truths of our own failures. The corresponding utopian fantasies of other cultures more closely resemble the morality play of a veto of a token, nor no novel that more complex experiences of people who actually lived on earth. A UK based IEA economist Christine Nimitz recently observed in a short Twitter thread about anti-British ness signalling disgust at our own culture and history has little to do with truth or helping marginalised communities. Instead, it’s a way to advertise the superficial cleverness of radical self-criticism by castigating the United States on social media with our K-12 or university students, we can flatter our moral egos without needing to donate money or time to communities in need. It fosters division, and the main beneficiaries are not Native Americans or other marginalised groups. But whoever is collecting likes and followers online. We could do better than this. U.S. history should be clear and accurate about the US’s misdeeds. But we should also acknowledge that the U.S. overcame its faults to become a beacon for progress. In the same way, we should highlight the wonderful culture, arts, religion and so on of American Indians without turning them into pious exemplars. A pastoral innocence and moral instruction. Are ethnic studies, quote unquote curricula to often lapse into propaganda designed to indict the Shah and shame the West in all its works? People and cultures are complex. People and cultures are complex. If students were permitted to understand that human failings are universal but can be overcome, it may help to alleviate the depression and anxiety of those unjustly burdened by the sins of their ancestors. So I embrace about 80% of this. I think it’s quite good. As to the substantive part, and I’ve now ordered this book and I read it a lot of it over the weekend. And but let’s get to the heart of the matter here. Why am I telling you about it? Because he’s exactly right. This punching bag. Of the United States ought not be a punching bag of the United States. The idea that Native Americans or others. Had these pure cultures. Near perfect societies, and so is a lie. Now, this is the first gentleman to write about it, Piqua Hamlin. The Indians took slaves too, tortured, mutilated, raped, as did white people, as did black people, particularly in Africa. As did Asian people. And in some of these societies, it still occurs. Hell in the United States, it still occurs. But the idea that we now teach, oh, it’s a white dominance society and everything that’s wrong with this, to say this critical race theory is the fault of that mentality. Is sickening. Individualism is replaced with what I call group ism. Group ism. You’re born a certain way, then you’re identified a certain way and there’s not a damn thing you can do about it. That is horrendous. That is horrendous. And yet that is critical race theory. And that is what’s being taught. When you say you can’t say colorblind society, like my wife was told by the superintendent in Fairfax County two nights ago, because saying colorblind society means you’re promoting a white, dominant, racist society. That is sickening. That means you cannot view individuals as individual human beings with their own hearts and souls and brains with their own motivations. With their own conduct, with their own love, with their own activity, with their own motivation. No, no, you’re grouped. And this serves the purposes of government, whether it’s the Fairfax County School system, whether it’s the Loudoun County School system, both in Virginia, whether it’s the thousands and thousands of school systems across the country, whether it’s the media that creates narratives and certainly whether it’s government and politicians. Because individualism, there’s 369 of us with our own ideas, our own beliefs, our own thoughts. It’s just much easier to say while there’s this number of white people will categorize all these people as white. There’s this number of black people will categorize them as white, excuse me as black. This number of Asian people will get around. And then we we issue executive orders with equity dictates. Which specifically you say African-Americans, Native Americans, these Americans, those Americans, they get this this group, this group, this group does not. They’re not on the list. That’s totalitarian. That’s the federal government today. That’s the Democrat Party. That’s who they are. They don’t believe in individualism. They believe in group ism. Cooper’s. In other words, classes like Marxism put the pitch in groups. Marx wasn’t focused on race. So the race hustlers figured out it’s a perfect way to advance the Marxist agenda. And that’s what they’ve done. And that’s what your kids are learning in school. I can’t say colorblind society. That’s not what Martin Luther King meant in 1963. August 28th. At the Lincoln Memorial when he said that’s not what he meant. What he meant was and then they go ahead and they line. No, no, no. You don’t understand what he actually meant. Oh, okay. What did he actually mean? So keep this in mind. It’s very important. And none of these societies are utopian societies. None of these societies were so far ahead that. They treated women properly and gay people a certain way or. They they issued penalties and they didn’t tortured, they didn’t rape, they didn’t enslave. Yes, they did. I’ll be right back.
Segment 4
You know, there is a word that’s been coined not by me that’s out there called presentism Present ism. Presentism. And what that has come to mean is you project on today’s you take from today’s society the more mores and values and so forth and you project them on to the past. And it doesn’t work very well, does it? Because things evolve over time. And so this is used to destroy American history, to destroy Madison’s home and Jefferson’s home and the whole narrative of the great American founding. But it is never applied to other cultures. Have you noticed that? Know this, that. Mr.. But it’s never applied to other cultures. Presentism. And I would add, that’s sort of what the guy’s point is. So we take today’s what we consider progress and apply it. 200, 250 years ago. Which is fine, but to do so in a cherry picked way is not fine. Now. I don’t believe we should do it at all, but that’s fine. It’s not applied to Native American tribes. It’s not applied to African tribes. It’s not applied to. Arab tribes. And I can go down the list of ethnicities. And it is not. It’s only applied. To the American majority. And that’s why critical race theory is such cancer and such poison. And that’s why the superintendent of Fairfax County should be removed. Because you can’t say colorblind society. The victims of those cultures. They wouldn’t appreciate the fact that they’re overlooked. Would they? They wouldn’t appreciate the fact that they were held as slaves. They women were raped. People were tortured, slaughtered, disemboweled, murdered in the most horrendous way. No, I don’t think so. This is why The New York Times is such a. Rotten, lousy piece of propaganda. The teachers unions and the educational bureaucracy. Colleges and universities on down are such loathsome demagogues. And the Democrat Party is such a vile anti-American institution. Just my opinion. You know, I agree with it. I want to play something for you, and it doesn’t make me happy to play this. It’s not the end of the world. It’s not the end of the world, but it doesn’t make me happy to have to play this a column as I see him, whether Ross Douthat understands it or not. Kevin McCarthy Hat tip, right. Scoop. Cuddle up and go. Why wouldn’t you sit down and negotiate and talk? If there’s differences, you can always find ways that you can solve this problem. If you think the only action is to go to court, I believe that’s wrong in the places instead of solving it. This is a big employer inside Florida. I think the governor should shut down with him. I don’t think the idea of building a prison next to a place that you bring your family is the best idea. I think it would be much better if you sat down and solve the problems. But for the same point, if you’re going to be a large employer inside this state, you should also abide by the rules and run your business. And don’t think you should get into politics. But that’s all well and good. But they did, and they have. And when you’re governor, you have to confront this. And we have hundreds, if not thousands of corporations in this country who are joining with the cultural mob and destroying America. And when you’re a governor and they’re reaching into your classrooms to try and prevent you. From preventing the teachers unions and the special interest groups on the hard left and the woke mobs from destroying your educational system. You’re supposed to sit down and negotiate with Disney. I want to continue this after the top of the hour, but this is a big disappointment for me. We should be getting behind Ron DeSantis because he’s fighting the woke Warriors.