Share This Episode
The Charlie Kirk Show Charlie Kirk Logo

The Origins of Woke with Richard Hanania

The Charlie Kirk Show / Charlie Kirk
The Truth Network Radio
October 19, 2023 5:00 am

The Origins of Woke with Richard Hanania

The Charlie Kirk Show / Charlie Kirk

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 649 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


October 19, 2023 5:00 am

America is split about 50/50 politically, so why does everything seem to be liberal? Why is wokeness pushed full time by every school, every company, and every government agency? According to writer Richard Hanania, the cause is shockingly simple: A handful of laws, passed in the 60s and 70s, are holding up the entire edifice of human resources, affirmative action, and institutional wokeness. Remove those laws, and it will evaporate. Richard joins Charlie to explain his fascinating idea, and plant the seeds for a right-wing rollback of the left's power.

Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/support

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Hey, feeling unsure about your finances these days?

You're not alone. That's why Noble Gold Investments is here to help. Just hear it straight from the people they've helped. The Noble crew walked me through everything with no stress.

With their help, I could finally sleep easy at night. And now this month, Noble Gold Investments is handing out a free 5oz Silver America the Beautiful coin if you qualify for an IRA. Invest in gold and silver with Noble Gold Investments. Go to noblegoldinvestments.com right now.

That is noblegoldinvestments.com right now. Hey, everybody to Charlie Kirk show. Richard Hananiah, new book, Origins of Woke joins us.

I think you'll really enjoy this conversation. Email us as always, freedom at charliekirk.com. Become a member, go to charliekirk.com and click on the members tab. Get involved with Turning Point USA at tpusa.com. Start a high school or college chapter today at tpusa.com.

That is tpusa.com. Email us as always, freedom at charliekirk.com. Buckle up everybody. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy, his spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.

We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Brought to you by the loan experts I trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandtodd.com. I can't tell you how many friends of mine have been texting me, Charlie, you have to have Richard on. You have to have Richard on. Origins of Woke is the name of the book and Richard Hananiah joins us. I hope I said that right, Richard. Richard, welcome to the program. This is part of a series of conversations we are doing about where does Woke come from.

You know, the book that really changed my perspective on this was, of course, Christopher Caldwell's book, Age of Entitlement, where he dared to question the idea of the origin of the civil rights law. So we're going to spend the whole hour on this. I just want to talk about some of your pieces on foreign policy. But first, Richard, take some time to introduce yourself to our audience. Yeah, well, I'm glad to be here, Charlie. I mean, I've always been a big fan of your show.

I've been a big fan of what, you know, the empire you built. I'm a lapsed academic. I was, you know, I got my degree from UCLA. I've been at Columbia. I've been at the University of Texas until recently.

At some point, you know, I found out it was better to go off on my own. So now people can find me on Substack and Twitter. And yeah, I'm just a guy who writes about American politics. Well, very cool.

Tell us about your book. And, you know, it's really important because it's probably one of the most used terms right now in the country. Woke, woke, woke, woke. I think most conservatives can define what woke is.

Maybe call everything racist till you control it, right? Things that make no sense reasonably irrationally. Some people can't, but very few people have done the research to say, where does this come from? And you've done a phenomenal job in this book, Origins of Woke, to do the research. And you say here, and I want to just read part of the introduction, that this has been over a decade of thinking. It was only the mid 2010s that the subject of wokeness came to dominate political discourse. The phenomenon seemed to start on college campuses.

Within a few years, it has migrated to other institutions. So Richard, where does this come from? What thinkers, what philosophers started what we now call the woke? Yeah, so Caldwell's book talked about the Civil Rights Act. And it was really the years after the Civil Rights Act where all the government bureaucrats, judges, people, you know, like the EEOC and other departments of the executive branch, they came out and they started basically interpreting non-discrimination in the way that we consider, you know, that we would call woke today. People think these are new ideas, for example, that if cops arrest one race more than others, or one group does better on a test than the other, the test must somehow be racist. This was the interpretation of the Civil Rights Act from like the first decade, right?

And you can actually trace it in the book. I don't focus on thinkers as much like my friend Chris Rufo does and some other people in their books, because you can really show how it's pretty direct from the government. The government basically says, you have to think about race this way, you have to classify your work this way. And you see, historically, the rise in, for example, human resources departments, which start just going up on the 1960s, 1970s. You see Title IX used at the universities where the government, it's direct, it's not, you know, it's the government coming in and saying, you have to hire these people, you have to treat men and women, you have to, you have to sort of micromanage their sexual relations, you have to change your sports programs. And so yeah, the argument of the book is that basically it was the perversion of the Civil Rights Act and a few laws that came after it that really forced institutions to become, you know, hyper aware of race and sex and to judge people on that basis. Even if there was no, even if companies didn't want to, even if they didn't buy into the ideology, it became something like a state religion, starting in the 1960s and 1970s.

And it's only expanded until then. Yeah, and it's created this regime. And also, it's now had impact in culture.

And so, Richard, I want to just ask this question. Typically, the American right will use the Breitbart quote, which I think can be right. Politics flows downstream from culture. But in some ways, culture can also flow downstream from politics. You can legislate things that can then impact the culture.

Do you believe that is true, especially when it comes to wokeism? Because in some ways, we were heavily heavily legislating something, whether it be affirmative action, hiring quotas, whether it be race based preferential treatment, you know, disciplining based on race. And in some ways, that built this standard in American life that the unforgivable sin was thou shall not even think a racist thought. It was worse than being a crummy person, worse than even, quite honestly, some sexual crimes. It was worse that you've even had a thought of racism in your mind.

How did that come to be? And do you believe that politics actually can influence culture as equally as culture can influence politics? Yeah, I'm glad you bring up the Breitbart quote, Charlie.

You know, it's obviously both. I mean, Paul, you know, imagine a world where politics didn't influence culture or culture didn't influence politics and law. Look, I mean, regulations come from the government.

Businesses have to go through their work, thinking about these regulations and thinking about what's going to get me in trouble, what's going to bring good press, what's going to keep the federal government off my back. And so in many cases, you can see the direct connection between the law and then the culture. So for example, how we classify race, the words, you know, Hispanic and Latino, and I show an analysis of Google Ngrams. And the word like AAPI, Asian American Pacific Island didn't exist in the English language really.

I couldn't find any use of it in any book before 1975 using the Google Ngram search. But then government puts these groups together and suddenly we have AAPI heritage month. Suddenly we have, you know, AAPI hate, right? Like these categories that make no sense. And people start talking about individual ethnicities like Mexican American or Puerto Ricans less than they did in previous decades. So in many cases, you can actually see the direct connection between the government doing something and then the culture changing. You know, the idea that like, for example, tests are racist, that this was not part of American culture in the 1980s and 1990s, for example, but it was part of law in 1971, the Griggs v. Duke Power case. So the government first told people that it's racist if you have a test where whites do better than blacks or any really any hiring criterion on which whites do better than blacks. And that didn't that didn't become part of the culture until decades, decades later. So I think in the case of wokeness, you could trace it pretty directly by just looking looking at the history and looking at things chronologically, these things, these things were mandated by law, or there were classifications or regulations that people or businesses or institutions had to adopt. And then the culture changed decades down the line.

So in some ways, this was inevitable, right? You can't build this entire civil rights Leviathan, or machine that has such a hyper fixation on race, and then act as if race will stop being a big part of the American narrative and political life. And the country I desire to live in is where race really isn't that big of a deal at all.

It's the country that I used to live in at least culturally now it's the exact opposite. And so what we what we saw, at least how I understand is that in an attempt or an intention to de emphasize race, we actually live in a country that is more focused on race anytime since the 1960s riff on that, Richard, Yeah, I mean, you know, you and I both want to live in that country where people are judged based on their individual attributes and accomplishments. The federal government, I mean, the point of my book is the federal government has made that impossible. You want government contracts, they're telling you, classify all your employees by race and sex, see how many of each group that you have. This was since the 1970s. This is not something that just, you know, Obama or, or Biden did. So you're absolutely right. I think it's sort of miraculous, like, how long it took for us to become this, this race obsessed.

And I think that yeah, we're gonna have to change the laws in order to go back back to the country that you and I both want. Origins of woke is the name of the book. It's being very well reviewed. And it is very deep because people say, Charlie, where does this come from? Let me read to you some of the chapter titles. For example, government as the creator of new races and genders, social engineering as a cause of stagnation, and social strife, Republicans and civil rights law and what is to be done.

You can check it out origins of woke. Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here, aren't you tired of not making a difference? You can we can make a difference standing for life by giving free ultrasounds with our friends at preborn in a Dobbs world states decide about abortion. And so many liberal states are taking extreme stands, even allowing abortion up to literally the second before a baby is born.

It's unbelievable, but true. And in California, the demand for abortions has increased 400% in part because the state is inviting women and girls to come to California for the sole purpose of aborting their baby. This is abortion trafficking. Take a stand for life by providing an ultrasound for a young woman. When you do she is twice as likely to choose life. I'm a donor and you should be to to preborn just $28 provides that ultrasound and saves one baby $140 saves five a gift of $15,000 provides an ultrasound machine that can save thousands of babies for years to come. Call 833-850-2229 or click on the preborn banner at charliekirk.com.

That is charliekirk.com and click on the preborn banner. So some of these laws say, quote, you can't discriminate based on race or sex, but the exact opposite ends up happening with mandatory discrimination. How did that happen?

It's really amazing. So you go back to when they're they're passing the Civil Rights Act and you have these you have these senators and people knew that reverse discrimination was a possibility. They knew that there could be something like disparate impact where you would just declare tests or other kinds of things racist, because one group did better than the other. And they swore up and down the senators who were trying to get their colleagues to vote for the Civil Rights Act.

They swore up and down. They said if there's anything in here for quotas, Hubert Humphrey said, you know, I'll eat the bill, I'll start eating the pages of the bill. There was other others who said that an employer can still set the standard as high as he wants, even if all of his employees end up being white. All they said was we are ending racial discrimination, Jim Crow style discrimination, then discrimination also in the private sector, too. But that meant explicit, intentional discrimination, not wanting to hire a group of people.

Right. And, you know, everyone, the Civil Rights Act gets signed, everyone is sort of happy Americans pat themselves on the back because they they think they overcame the racist the race problem because it was, you know, it was something limited to the south and they were they were moving beyond it. And, you know, the US, you know, goes back to, you know, the most of the country goes back to their normal lives and their normal politics. But these bureaucrats who are concerned with racial equity, a lot of them sort of have communist or socialist backgrounds. They keep working and they and they push for, you know, numerical representation. And the and when they get to court, they think they're going to lose. But the judges actually end up agreeing with them. They end up throwing out the original intent of the Civil Rights Act. And they basically implement what today we would call the racial equity agenda. And so, yeah, we've been in this place for the last 50 years where even if you, you know, until recently, until, you know, sort of the rise of people like Ibram Kendi and Robin DiAngelo, your mainstream leftists would still say, you know, we want to treat people as individuals. Oh, maybe black people haven't been treated so fairly in the past. Maybe we need to do something to overcome discrimination. But the ideal was always there that we would be treated sort of as individuals. But the law has never been that like the people need to understand that the law has required racial classification, has required, has required, you know, employers, private institutions to take steps to restrict speech in order not to create a hostile work environment.

And so I really go in depth on how like you think you've lived your whole life in a country where race doesn't matter, at least everyone aspired to a world where race doesn't matter. Your federal government has not been acting like that for a very, very long time. And I just want to sort of expose that and get people excited about potentially changing it. So the question I have, then, is if they can totally invert the law, then how do we then fix it? And can't they just invert the next law they pass? Or is there some sort of a trick or some sort of lesson that we can learn so that the next intent is not just used if we're able to actually fix this legislatively? Yeah. So I think when people think that, oh, are they going to, you know, twist the law?

Are they going to? I think often they're thinking about universities. And I think that's right in the university context.

Like, I'm glad that the Supreme Court has outlawed affirmative action on university campuses. But look, the universities are far, you know, far left wing people, they're going to find a way just because this is who they are. I mean, they are obsessed with race, they're obsessed, you know, that they have these radical views on gender and sexual orientation and everything.

And that's a real problem. The rest of society, though, you know, like the private institutions, people worry about woke capital, you know, they're just trying to make money, they're trying to live a quiet life. Even in the last few years, just with a little bit pushback from conservatives, people have been sort of abandoning woke capital, conservatives have actually been winning these boycotts of these culture war where, you know, companies aren't becoming conservative, but at the very least, they're, you know, they're taking a step back and saying, maybe we don't want to be at the forefront of Pride Month or any of these other things. And so yeah, they're, you know, I do think that like, there are places where, you know, the ideology of the places are so far gone, conservatives just don't have representation within universities admissions departments, and those people have different ideals. And, you know, it's great to make their lives harder.

It's great to, you know, make them have to hide it or make them have to do this or that. But I think for the rest of society, particularly private institutions, and like, just like, you know, the lived experience of most Americans most of the time, you know, public opinion is with is with conservatives on these issues. All polls show that when they go to the ballot box and vote on initiatives, we know we see that people want colorblindness. So I'm optimistic that we change the laws, we, you know, we fix them in a smart way, we can potentially change the culture. We're finally waking up and realizing that the ideal that we thought we were living under is not quite that, that it's a different legislative reality.

And that a huge part of the menace of the anti-white hatred that is happening in our country is made possible because of the legislative fights that we didn't pick the last couple of decades. self-employed and are finding it difficult to qualify because of that. They have my 100% full and complete endorsement. Call them and help you prepare. I'm telling you anything mortgage related, please call them and not the big woke bags. Go to andrewandtodd.com. That's andrewandtodd.com. Fill out the quick form and they will get back to the answers. Call them at 888-888-1172, andrewandtodd.com. They're good friends of mine, full and complete endorsement.

If you are a first time home buyer renting and want to be, they'll call and help you prepare. Check it out, andrewandtodd.com. That is andrewandtodd.com. Fill out the quick form and they'll get you back with answers, andrewandtodd.com. So Richard, I want to get to one part of this, which I want to dedicate the most of our time on, and people have got to check out the book Origins of Woke, which I want to talk about what then can be done.

That is chapter seven of your book. We are an action-oriented show. We have a lot of grassroots warriors that listen. From your experience, legislative is one thing, but I want to talk more about cultural, even language that is used. What are the greatest vulnerabilities in the woke regime?

Where are their weaknesses that we can exploit? Yeah, so I mean, it's very focused on legislative. I mean, legislation is hard. That's obviously true, but some things are relatively easy within the political system, like executive orders and judicial decisions. Vivek Ramaswamy has promised to repeal the executive order, because I told him about it, about that requires affirmative action in government contracting, which covers a huge part of the private workforce. So a president can do that on day one. I have those kinds of suggestions.

I have a nice table, which tells you what judges can do, what legislatures can do, what states can do, what potentially the next president can do. So yeah, I think people should look at what Vivek is saying about these things and sort of encourage other presidential candidates to make promises on these matters, the ones that I highlight in the book. So yeah, there's that. I think there's an understanding that conservatives win on this issue. I mean, Glenn Youngkin, when he won the governorship of Virginia, it was about the schools and what they're teaching kids. It was just sort of wokeness and civil rights law, just sort of implemented in education curriculum.

People did it like that. So there's some conservative positions that are popular, some are unpopular. Treat people as individuals, don't give them special privileges on account of race. Don't let liberals get away with a lie that all they want is to end discrimination. Don't let them get away with the lie that all they're doing is looking for a level playing field, because you could see throughout the law and throughout the things that get them angry and what they're pushing for, that that's not absolutely true.

So there is a culture component to this, and there is a legal sort of bureaucratic judicial component to this that people can start pushing back on immediately. So what people don't realize is that when it is left to the voters and affirmative action is asked the population, affirmative action is deeply unpopular. It loses almost every single time. Even in California, it loses. And I know you mentioned this in the book that conservatives should actually run on this electorally, but they're afraid to.

And this is another part, another element here. If I were to say one of the strengths of the bad guys, one of the strengths of the Wokeys is they're able to weaponize name calling the R word to create the American right to be in a state of perpetual paralysis that we will do. We'll talk about tax cuts and we'll talk about regulatory reform, but we won't actually talk about, I don't know, anti white race based discrimination in hiring practices, in college universities, all across the board. So, Richard, talk about how not only is it the moral right thing to do, it's actually insanely popular to get rid of these laws, these traditions that discriminate against groups of people, in particular white people. And I'm going to do a follow up question on the war on white people in a second.

But Richard, please. Yeah, you're right, Charlie. I mean, and, you know, Republicans have traditionally been afraid of these issues. I think that's changing.

I think conservative media now is, you know, focusing the focusing Republican politicians and they care more about that than they do the mainstream press. I just saw a news story a couple of months ago that Greg Abbott in Texas banned DEI hiring within Texas state government. You know, great. But, you know, Texas, you know, Texas has been controlled by a Republican governor for 30 years, right? I mean, they could have done this a very, very long time ago. The fact that they're doing it now, I mean, first of all, shows that Republicans have sort of been asleep, you know, asleep at the wheel for these last several decades, but also that something is changing. I mean, because of my book, because of people like Rufo really bringing to people's attentions, you know, just how pernicious and how deep, you know, and thanks to people like Kendi, to be frank, who just made it so obvious that the liberals have lost their minds. And so, yeah, I think you're right. Historically, you're right that it has been difficult.

It's getting easier. And I think conservatives are waking up. I mean, even, you know, even even during Trump's during Trump's presidency, we saw a little we saw some hints of this. We saw them rolling back the Title Nine stuff at universities.

We saw the ban on critical race theory, trainings in government. That was in the last few months of the administration. I think the next Republican administration is going to be doing this stuff. You know, people like me and you keep the pressure on. They'll be doing it in the first few months and they'll be they'll be making regulatory changes that actually stick.

So overall, you know, I'm optimistic on this. So let me ask you just about, you know, you talk about the origins of woke and there is almost this this built in acceptance of just kind of anti white dialog and hiring practices across the board. So you sent out a tweet recently that I thought was really smart. You said that, OK, totally get the anti Jew hatred. People should stop giving to these universities, you know, if it's against your values. But Richard, you also said that there has been a repeated track record of courses at University of Chicago, for example, abolish whiteness. Yale University had a ridiculous one about getting rid of white people.

I could go through the examples up top my head. But what why is it that there is such a resistance to isolate and to stop donations based on that? What why what where does the self loathing in waspy upper middle class white America come from where people are OK with that kind of narrative that I guess it's OK to do a seminar about what's wrong with white people or a struggle session or to have, you know, wine moms sit around the table and hire some D.E.I.

administrator to berate you. In fact, there's a video on a play on that in a second. Where does that come from? Richard, it's perplexing to me. Yeah, I mean, I think that, you know, you go back to the civil rights movement and there was, you know, all this idea that there were two groups of Americans, whites and blacks, you know, Native Americans, too. But basically, people saw white as sort of the default American. So there really wasn't a sort of white category.

Everything else was marked. I think, you know, Jews, because of the history of the distinct religious group and because of the Holocaust and sort of the way we think about, you know, ethnicity in this country are sort of in this in between place where they're considered white people, but can also be considered, you know, a minority group that could be subject to discrimination. And I think a lot of Jews feel that and a lot of Christians feel that on behalf of Jews, that when they see, you know, open anti-Semitism on university campuses, they're ready, they're ready to pull, you know, to stop donating money to really attack them to, you know, to take some action based on that. I think, you know, white Americans have just been sort of, you know, it's like this concept basically, you know, like left-wing people have that it really is, you know, one, I think, point that they make that's actually true. It's like, it's sort of the, it's still seen as sort of the default ethnicity, right? It's sort of seen as like, okay, you're, you're just a white person, right?

You could be from Armenia, or you could be from Sweden. That's just like sort of the default American and everyone else sort of gets a government category. I think that changes, you know, as white people get attacked for being white, right? I think that, you know, I think that when you say, you know, most people, most people, you know, in the previous generation, 10, 20, 30 years ago, they didn't think of themselves as a white person, maybe they thought of themselves as an American, American, or maybe Irish or Italian or something like that.

But when you really go out of your way to attack people as a group, that builds a kind of, that builds a kind of group, you know, group consciousness. And, you know, I don't want white racial consciousness, I don't want racial consciousness for any group of people. But I think this is an inevitable backlash to the way liberals have been sort of thinking about and talking about race. It's still not there yet, where, like, whites are still not completely comfortable pushing back against that, against this stuff.

But we're getting, we're getting there. And I think that, like, you know, I think that people are just sort of understanding the left has sort of forced it on people to think about these things in a way they didn't really want to before. Yeah, I mean, there's an ugliness that they're almost inviting here.

And I don't know if they even thought this through. I want to play this piece of tape here, Richard, it's about 40 seconds long. And it's a bunch of white women sitting around the table, and they hired this black lady to berate them.

To, like, say, like, are you racist? And they're like, they're literally sipping wine. Like, you could not have it be more stereotypical suburban wine moms. Oh, it's an Indian woman. That's the DEI administrator. I'm sorry, I stand corrected. But no, they do these struggle sessions. And instead of like going out for a movie or having book club, you now have higher struggle session DEI administrator club.

They pay for this. Play cut 59. You actually, Margaret, you didn't say yours. What? You're racist thing. Thing that you've done, thought about or done.

You have something inside of you. That's not quite like that's racist. So you must have you must have examples in your own life.

I also work in environmental engineering. I have absolutely no people of color or minimal people of color, possibly exclusively slightly Hispanic. So you doesn't like her attitude. I can say a racist thing you've done because it just happened when you just talked to me the way you just did. This is how white women talk to us all the time.

These are microaggressions. It goes on, Richard. They pay for this and it's filmed. Your reaction. I thought this is so powerful. It's like she's lecturing the poor white lady who shouldn't subject herself to this. This is Maoist struggle session type stuff.

Richard, minute riff on that, please. Yeah, Charlie, I just look at that group of women and I and I just think as a man, I think we men have failed at some aspect of our lives. They that women want to get around and hire this woman to berate them on account of their race. I think something has gotten terribly wrong with sort of the mentality of the public and just relations between men and women. So I just encourage men be better. I claim responsibility for this kind of stuff because it really shouldn't happen. Well, it's also and I this is not meant to be misogynistic. A group of men would not do that.

I'm sorry, which is what you have at some point when you're when a testosterone level goes over like 300 or 400. You're like, actually, I'm going to use a bunch of four letter words, get the heck out of my house, and I'm being very nice. Right. And, you know, these women, you could see her poor woman. She know what she needs. She needs her husband next to her to go like tell that freak D.I.

administrator to go get lost. Again, I'm not the first one to say this. There's been plenty of books written on this and there are more even coming when you overly feminize the society, the society collapses. We only talk about happens when you get too masculine.

OK, you get Mussolini, whatever. What happens? You get too feminine.

You get fat. It's really sick. to the hardest hit areas. Call the special phone number 800-492-5454 to make an emergency donation.

Again, that's 800-492-5454. Your emergency gift will help the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews save lives and provide critical essentials needed right now. During this dark time, the need in war torn areas will be tremendous. The fellowship has extensive network of staff, partner organizations and more immediately respond with life saving security and support measures. We ask all people to pray for safety and protection. Call 800-235-887 as we rush urgent need right now to help Israel through the International Fellowship of Christian Jews. OK, let's play cut 60.

Richard Hananiah continues. White supremacy is said to be hidden in innocuous phrases and banal behavior. The smallest things could be considered racist. It's enough that a person from a minority group feels insulted. Absolutely. Sounding terribly white.

I don't know that I was all that racist to start with, but I also would be more aware or hyper aware of my thoughts or reactions to circumstances that would be racist. All right. So, Richard, that's the second part of the clip. I mean, it worked. She got re-educated. She bought into it.

The shame session was great. And so, Richard, just to close this up, and I do want to talk a little bit about foreign policy just for a second. That kind of self-loathing is civilizational suicide. You can't have that happen on a mass scale and anticipate survival.

Richard Hananiah, Origins of Woke, your response? Yeah, I think you're right. And I think if we were facing sort of an existential enemy that was trying to conquer us or something, you're right.

This stuff would, first of all, I think this stuff is sort of a luxury that you have when you're very safe. And during World War II, even the early days after 9-11, you didn't see a lot of this stuff. And so, you're absolutely right. I think in a case of, right now, the Israel-Gaza conflict is going on. You see a lot less of it in Israel, a lot of the pressure for sort of human rights and sort of blaming Israel for the conflict. That's coming more so from the West.

But you're absolutely right. There is a sort of foreign policy component to this. And there's a way that like foreign policy and the dangers that you actually feel are related to just how goofy and silly you can be in your domestic politics. In closing here, Richard, you have another book, Public Choice Theory and the Illusion of Grand Strategy, How Generals, Weapons, Manufacturers, and Foreign Governments Shape American Foreign Policy.

Huge topic. How should we think about the Israeli conflict unfolding right now? So, yeah, I mean, I have a recent article that said wars of necessity and wars of choice.

And I think that, you know, we in America since, you know, the Second World War really have been fighting what have unquestionably been wars of choice, right? And I think Israel is in a war of necessity mode. I think that what the attacks by Hamas showed in the, you know, last week was that we cannot, you know, this is not sustainable, right? You can't have a population on your border that fires rockets, that's going to occasionally do raids, that you're going to have to worry about them taking, you know, taking women and children hostage, you know, slaughtering families. And so, yeah, I think we should be supporting Israel here.

I think this is, you know, this is right to self-defense that any government would be entitled to and would, you know, would undertake without hesitation if they were in a similar situation. And so, yeah, you know, I hope that the U.S., you know, stays strong on the side of Israel during this conflict. It just sort of understands that, you know, for us, the Middle East, we can take it or leave it. We don't have to be involved in the Middle East. We don't have to fight wars. We don't have to think about that region at all if we didn't want to. They don't have that luxury.

And so that's why they're in such a tough situation. So Richard Hananiah is the author of several books, Origins of Woke, being one of them, and very important, Public Choice Theory and the Illusion of Grand Strategy, How Generals, Weapons Manufacturers, Foreign Governments Shape American Policy. One minute remaining, Richard, anything you want to plug, substack, anything, please make our audience aware of it. Yeah, people can subscribe to my substack. It's just richardhananiah.com. I publish articles, you know, a couple times a week usually. They're, you know, they're free.

There's no cost to sign up. A lot of people can also find me on Twitter. And yeah, Origins of Woke is, you know, it's on Amazon. It's in Audible, Kindle, you know, wherever you can get your, wherever you get your books. I think that, you know, I think that you'll read the book and you'll sort of understand where this stuff came from. And I think you're going to see sort of American society and governance in a new light. So yes, please get the book. I obviously highly recommend it, but I think, I think your audience will learn something from it. Yeah, it's very deep.

Definitely learn something. Richard is also, he is not a boring follow on Twitter. I'll tell you what, you follow Richard on social media.

You will be entertained. Richard, thanks for the time. Really appreciate it.

Hope to have you on again soon. Thank you. Thank you, Charlie. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us as always freedom at charliekirk.com. Thanks so much for listening and God bless. For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com. Unapologetic watch anytime on any screen at snc.tv and local now channel 525.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-10-19 06:13:23 / 2023-10-19 06:28:31 / 15

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime