Share This Episode
The Charlie Kirk Show Charlie Kirk Logo

Ask Charlie Anything 188: The End of the Boy Scouts? Non-Compete Clauses? The Kashmir Question?

The Charlie Kirk Show / Charlie Kirk
The Truth Network Radio
May 13, 2024 5:00 am

Ask Charlie Anything 188: The End of the Boy Scouts? Non-Compete Clauses? The Kashmir Question?

The Charlie Kirk Show / Charlie Kirk

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 801 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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


May 13, 2024 5:00 am

Andrew and Blake field questions from Charlie Kirk Exclusive subscribers, including:

 

-What do they think of the Boy Scouts changing their name to be "inclusive"?

-Is banning non-compete clauses pro-capitalist, or an infringement on economic freedom?

-The question you've all been waiting for: What is Charlie's opinion on the Kashmir question?

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

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Hey everybody. Ask Me Anything episode non-competes. What do we think about them?

The death of the Boy Scouts and more. Blake joins the program for an Ask Me Anything episode brought to you by members. If you're a member, you get to ask me questions directly members.charleykirk.com. So check it out members.charleykirk.com.

Very important. If you can do that helps our program out tremendously members.charleykirk.com. That is members.charleykirk.com. Email us as always freedom at charleykirk.com and subscribe to our podcast and again become a member members.charleykirk.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. Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of The Charlie Kirk Show, a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals. Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble Gold Investments at noblegoldinvestments.com. That is noblegoldinvestments.com. It's where I buy all of my gold.

Go to noblegoldinvestments.com. They are counting on your surrender. If you give up, they win.

But what if we look back and we realize we were just inches away from victory and that's when we decided to give up. Join us and thousands of American patriots for the summer convention that all are invited to. You're going to hear how we're going to win in 2024. With the biggest speakers in the movement, featuring President Donald J Trump, Charlie Kirk, Vivek Ramaswamy, Governor Kristi Noor, Dr. Ben Carson, Steve Bannon, Candace Owens, Laura Trump, Senator Rick Scott, Congressman Matt Gaetz, Benny Johnson, Jack Posobach, and more.

June 14th through 16th. 2024 is our final battle in Detroit, Michigan. The great silent majority is rising like never before. Join us for the People's Convention. This is a new ball game, everybody. You send a message.

We play to win. Register now at tpaction.com slash peoples. Members dot Charlie Kirk dot com to ask us questions exclusively on air. Let's start with an email question. Some people are working and they can't do a live question, but only members. And if you are a member, you get to listen to all of our episodes, advertiser free.

You can ask us questions and we have a building community and you can see the exclusive Charlie Kirk op ed on members dot Charlie Kirk dot com. This is from Kimberly. Charlie, I cannot call in today because I had to work. I work for a very well corporation.

I'm going to say what corporation it is. They have disguised as idea. Have you heard this yet? It's now inclusion, diversity, equity, acceptance. Ooh, they're always changing to a tweet about that. There's one one company rebranded it as like IED, like the frickin bombs they're setting in Iraq. Yeah, incendiary explosive devices, improvised, improvised explosive.

But so idea that that would be we should we should do a tweet about how they're rebranding the venom. My question is, what are your thoughts and rifts on President Trump's recent comments and his address on antisemitism? To me, he's just the same or worse, calling for all antisemitic people's death. It makes me teary and angry and in disbelief, and I now struggle to fully support him, fully against First Amendment rights. I've let two or three things go, knowing he's the only one that can realistically turn things around, so on and so forth. Really, when you have time listen to this whole podcast, these things grieve me, so on and so forth.

Okay. I might not have caught that. Did you? I feel like I've been looking for it since we saw this question. And the problem is Google is useless now. And if you search like Trump antisemitic speech, you just get Biden's speech because Google only shows you recent news stories.

So I am still looking for this. But I don't feel like I've heard Trump say that. But I must say, it's in like the zone of potential things that I could imagine Trump saying. You just say like, these antisemites, they're bad people.

They got they got to go. He could say something. Yeah, I mean, but I just I just the the antisemitic bill, I don't think he embraced or endorsed in particular. I don't think so. Yeah, I would say it's definitely Congress that's going really wacky here.

We haven't even talked about it, but there was some bill, I think in the Senate, I think maybe Marsha Blackburn put it in, but I can't remember who exactly. But they said, like anyone who protests Israel too aggressively on campus, they will be exiled to Gaza, which, while funny, is that's a little cringe. Yeah, and that kind of loopy. I agree. I mean, I agree.

I think we're both concerned. Like, we've I think we've taken a pretty consistent line. And I think a lot of the Trump supporting right has taken a consistent line of you can protest, you can say what you want on campus. You know, if the rules let you you can even set up an encampment. But once that you're breaking the rules or trespassing or attacking people or intimidating, you know, doing real violence.

Yeah, you're breaking the law, and we're going to shut it down. And we should be in favor of maximum speech and minimal crime. And the left is always they're the ones who invert this. They're the ones who say that when we riot, it's speech. But when you speech, it's it's violence. And you're not allowed to do that because it intimidated people.

And the way to stand against that is to actually be very robust, pro speech, anti violence, and they're the ones who love violence. So put them in very morally clear in that way. And the bill is a trash bill. Let's just be honest.

It's a terrible bill. Okay, let's go to two of our good supporter friends, Caleb and Michelle. They are here to ask us the question live on air. Caleb and Michelle, what is on your mind? Really good. Good to see you. I had this weird dream last night that you and Erica came over to our house for supper.

And it was it was weird because Erica didn't say anything. And about every six to 12 minutes you got up and left the room. Oh, wow. Well, me getting up a lot to make phone calls would be probably accurate, right? So I don't sit still well.

But that's funny. So what's on your mind, guys? With the Boy Scouts of America continuing their decline and transition into inclusivity. And I know you're, you know, you're an Eagle Scout. What's your take on the Christian scouting group Trail Life and their focus on fathers raising boys to be men of character? I love Trail Life.

And so I want to make sure I plug them. This is a competitor to the Boy Scouts. But we did not actually cover the Boy Scout issue here on the program. So I want to dive into that.

So glad you brought this up, Caleb. So the really big fan of Trail Life and want to talk about them more in the future as well. So let's talk about what happened with Boy Scouts. So yes, by background, I'm an Eagle Scout. Same here. Oh, you are an Eagle Scout? Yeah, I thought that was one thing I had over you.

No, no, sorry. What was what was your Eagle Scout project? I planted a hosta garden at like a Lutheran school. And that's, that's like a legit. Yeah.

You know, some of these like super fake now, right? Yeah. Like I cleaned up a park in an afternoon. Yeah. Mine took two days.

It should be something that you know, it's not just the time. It's like something where you really build or you know, yeah, like not it is a permanent change. So that's exactly right.

It's not just like, you know, it could be undone, right by a bunch of literers. So, so you're an Eagle Scout. So this is a perfect discussion. It's got his trust, really loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent. That's our that's our Boy Scout. Was that the oath or the motto? That is the Scout law. That's the Scout law. Got it.

Help other people at all times to get myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight. I don't know if even they have that anymore. You got to have that word straight in there these days, but they're they're not gonna like that one. So what was the news? The Boy Scouts change their name? Scouting America now, because they don't they let girls in now.

I'm not sure the full scope of it, but I think at this point, girls can basically do everything in Scouts and become Eagle Scouts and everything like that. This is so the Boy Scouts of America still running SEO ads and it still has Boy Scouts of America on their website. They formally changed their name, I think March next year. They've like preannounced it basically. And I got to be very honest with you. This is this is a tragedy. A huge one. I would I start I kind of stopped following this closely.

After like 2017 or 2018 is when they first started letting girls in. And I had a friend of mine who has been involved in Scouting quite heavily. He was saying he was, you know, defending it saying this is why they need to do it. And I was just I was saying, I can just tell the direction this is headed, it's going to end really badly.

And frankly, everything I warned was going to play out I feel has played out. I think the biggest thing that stands out to me, like a reason that the Boy Scouts as it was, was such a great thing. It wasn't even so much like, oh, the political angle of it, like being, you know, kind of civic Christianity or anything. It was that it was a 100% positive thing. That was an all male space, for lack of a better term.

Very pro American, very pro American, all that stuff is great. But it's like an organization that is fun, that teaches useful skills, and is for boys. There's kind of there was nothing left in America, that is, as they say, like a male space. And males like having spaces. But no, they're necessary.

That's very important. So social, sociological data will show that if you have 15 men that are trying to climb a rope, they act a certain way. And it's actually the best way because they're company, they don't really care if they fall.

If you introduce a single female, their behavior completely changes. Exactly. Like military units ago, yes. So all of a sudden, they're afraid to fail, right? They want to impress the girl, they start like, you know, they stop really caring about like group excellence and more about like individual superiority. Yeah, they all compete with each other. Exactly. Whereas if it's just 15 boys, it's, they're still competing, but it's a different dynamic. They're actually more like encouraging of one another.

It's more like building up the least of these. And it's like, you know, even in you know, debates, for example, it's like, if you introduce someone who gets like, you know, women are a little more easily offended by things, and then like you change the rules to be more civil and like male debate spaces are like really agro. It's just men need spaces to be men. Well, boys need spaces to develop into men.

Yes. And that's what and I mean, scouting enriched my life. I love scouting.

It was amazing. That's so I want to keep going into this next segment because we're both Eagle Scouts and like Boy Scout camp was amazing and all the merit badge process like the actual way it used to be. It's a great American thing. Okay, let's play cut 164. It's the Boy Scouts of America CEO announcing the name change 164 sends this really strong message to everyone in America, that they can come to this program, they can bring their authentic self, they can be who they are.

And they can they will be welcomed here. The argument that I make with the people that say, Well, I always like Boy Scouts of America or BSA, why do we have to change? Go, you know, membership is at historic lows, right? Part of my job is to reduce all the barriers I possibly can for people to accept us as an organization and to join what a what a weak statement. So why do you think membership is low pal?

It's because of all the scandals. First of all, number two, it's bad leadership. Number three, it's because you guys have been watering down what it means to be part of Boy Scouts. Alright, so Blake, I was some of my best memories and most form of experiences were in the Boy Scouts. Summer Boy Scout camp, you just spend a week at it getting where was yours in like Minnesota. It was in it was near Yankton, South Dakota, Lewis and Clark Scout camp was the main is that a big one go to is pretty large. Maybe I'll go I would go back today and be like, Oh, this is tiny.

But it felt huge when I was a kid. So I found out the one I went to was called Camp Napawan. And they shut down. Ah, and it's just it's just so sad. It was 400 years, 400 years, 400 acres of rolling forest. That's awful.

I've actually I've wanted to revisit it so much. And it's it was as Napawan adventure base where memories are made. And it literally you go to their website, closing statement. This was back a couple years ago.

They're like, Yeah, sorry, difficult decision, not enough demand. Kids aren't boys aren't in boy scouting anymore. Yeah. And I don't know, maybe Lewis and Clark is like that I'd have to check. I'm actually I'd have to follow up even like, the scout troop that I was in what was an amazing troop. It was it had over 100 Eagle Scouts by the time that I graduated. We had our own scout house like we owned a residential house in in Sioux Falls. That was just for our scout troop.

Amazing stuff. Yours is still available. It's still open.

All righty. That's amazing. But I guess the scouting scouting is less amazing now.

It's just too bad. And it's a class. It's a very classic case of a few phenomena, which is like one a sort of right coded organization, as they would say, like scouting was not overtly conservative. It wasn't Republican.

It wasn't like an arm of any church or anything. But it was an organization that appealed to those people. And we have many cases and this is a really bad one of an organization like that, sort of treating its natural supporters like crap to try to win the approval or support of people who innately dislike them and are not on their side. So they're told by all these people, yeah, you guys have to become really pro gay and pro BLM and pro all of these things.

And if you do that, you'll thrive. And so they did that. They burned the bridge with all of their old supporters. The Mormons left. A lot of Christians left. They did their own thing. And then were these people there to join? No, they didn't actually care.

They didn't want to do that stuff. Yeah. All they care about is to be parasitic forces to destroy what already exists.

There's a great tweet. You've probably seen it before from the guy Iowa Hawk on Twitter where it's like Leftism 101, you know, take an organization, kill it, and then wear it as a skin and be like, oh, the Boy Scouts. Yeah, skin suit. Yeah.

It's like we control it even though it's completely terrible. Yeah. And they I went on Tucker's program. You were probably there when I went on Tucker's show. And I was the guest he had on as an Eagle Scout bashing women into Boy Scouts. And we could find that segment, I basically said, this is the end of Boy Scouts. Like, as soon as you allow women into Boy Scouts, it is the end of it. By the way, you have Girl Scouts of America.

Yeah. But the Girl Scouts never was as popular as Boy Scouts. It's different, I will say is that Girl Scouts, it's very focused kind of on women's empowerment. And so like, that's why the Girl Scout cookies are such a thing because they want to push entrepreneurship be a girl business.

That's fine. But let's be honest, we need like strong men in a society and Boy Scouts. How many presidents came out of Boy Scouting? I know Eisenhower was a Eagle Scout, I believe. Okay, I know there were several out of out of Boy Scouting, like astronauts.

I know there were a ton of astronauts, like limitless governors and senators, CEOs, we can get a list of the most famous Boy Scouts and Eagle Scouts. And for those that don't know in Boy Scouting, Oh, Mikey McCoy is also a Eagle Scout too. We got three Eagles, you know, what are the chances that I'm looking at famous Eagle Scouts? Do we have more Eagle Scouts around here? You're another Eagle Scout? Is that down?

Is that down? That's awesome. That's four Eagle Scouts in the office. That's why this place is so well run and clean. I'll just stop it. I'll just stop there. Um, is that only four in the office? That's actually super impressive.

You know, I think it's like less than 1% of 1% of people that enter Scouts actually end up becoming Yeah, one or 2% of Scouts, I think, yeah. Look, for over 10 years, Patriot Mobile has been America's only Christian conservative wireless provider, the only. When I say only, trust me, they are the only one. Patriot Mobile is a proud supporter of the show, and I'm proud to partner with them. Patriot Mobile offers dependable nationwide coverage, giving you the ability to access all three major networks, which means you get the same coverage you've been accustomed to without funding the left. When you switch to Patriot Mobile, you're sending a message that you support free speech, religious liberty, the sanctity of life, Second Amendment, our military veterans and first responder heroes. They're 100% US based customer service team makes switching quite easy. Keep your number, keep your phone or upgrade.

Their team will help you find the best plan for your needs. Just go to patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972 Patriot. Get a free month when you use offer code Charlie.

Join me and make the switch today. That is patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972 Patriot. That is patriotmobile.com slash Charlie. Patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972 Patriot. They have all three major networks. Check it out right now.

patriotmobile.com slash Charlie. Okay, I want to get to our next question here. But just so that those who are not in scouting know that there is a huge emphasis in scouting on acting ethically that if I were to say the biggest it was that you must be a good person before everything else. Exactly.

Would you agree that it's like really almost beat into you? It is ingrained into you like you must tell the truth that you being a good person is the most important thing to being a good citizen. Yes, the scouts law that we just recited, right? And from the the Eagle Scout project to the the way that you conduct yourself.

And I asked the question, you know, it's not in you know, it's not in the scout law. Nice. It never says the scout is nice.

No, it never says got it. I like that. That's true. It does say it's cheerful, cheerful, kind.

Those are similar, but they are not nice. And I love that. And someone says here, Rex Tillerson killed the Boy Scouts of America.

That's interesting. Didn't he run the Boy Scouts of America? Did he? I know that under Trump and Gates ran it. Not Bill Gates. Robert Gates. Did Tillerson do it? But but they I know that they were slammed with a bunch of lawsuits because of the sexual abuse stuff. I know that was the case. I know that they had like floods and floods of lawsuits, but they have ruined scouts.

And it is honestly one of the no spin, no B.S. tragedies because it has proven to produce very good people. And now where do young men go to get developed?

I guess the organization that Caleb mentioned. Okay. I mean, you just get things like they join like jujitsu gyms and stuff like those are the places they go to get like male companionship, which is good.

Yeah, it's fine. But it's not what's great about Boy Scouts is like everything fit together. It was skills and it was like a positive male space and it promoted kind of traditional values without having to be like sectarian, so to speak.

It was just everything about it was good. So, of course, it had to be killed. Yeah. And just to add on to that, there's a system to the Boy Scouts had a system that worked and they decided to destroy it.

That's what the left does. Okay, let's get to the next question here. It is Lisa, who is a member. And if you guys want to become a member, it's promo code.

New member gives people a who select a monthly option, a free month, and gives people who select an annual option, a nine percent discount, the close equivalent of a free month. Okay, Lisa, thank you for being a member. What is on your mind? Thank you so much, Charlie. My question is, what are your thoughts on the recent confirmation and announcement of the Department of Labor salary threshold increases and the FTC ban on non-compete agreements? And how do we combat that? It's a wonderful question.

Thank you, Lisa. I'm going to hand this off to Mr. Blake, because you actually flagged this. I asked the question and you can, is this even legal? Can the federal government ban contractual agreements between employers and employees? I've definitely sensed that it seems like an overreach for the FTC to come out and say, oh, we've decided this is illegal now. It is a huge reach to just say, oh, like Congress created this and we just realized this interpreting the law or this is within the scope of what the FTC does. I did ask a pretty prominent leader in like the tech space what the impact of this would be.

And what I will say is he didn't seem to think it would be that bad. And I can see an argument for this. He pointed out that non-competes like in tech, for example, are very much a way of entrenching the big competitor, like the big established players, because they say like, oh, you can't leave and start your own company ever.

It varies from place to place how legitimate that would be. But by its very nature, non-competes favor entrenched actors. They're already banned in some states. But how would they even get the idea that they can get between private contract law? Well, I mean, we have the Commerce Clause, which is the most elastic clause in the U.S. Constitution. So if you have any company that does any business between more than one state, the government can basically do whatever they want.

Like all of the civil rights acts are justified by the Commerce Clause. You know, they can do things like ban you from raising chickens, like growing wheat on your own farm to feed your own chickens, because in some tangential way, that would involve interstate commerce. So if you think of it that way, they can probably ban a non-compete contracts for a large company.

I think a lot of people are freaking out about this. I suspect it could easily get tossed out. I don't know if it would necessarily be a bad thing if it became law or like the worst thing in the world if it became law. I don't like it as an employer. I mean, you should be able to come to an agreement with your employees, right? Well, OK, but it's like clearly it's like a relatively coercive agreement. Like you can never leave and do your own company if you work for us, which is a lot of how this works.

Like a lot of non-competes say you cannot work in this industry for sure if you leave this company. That's kind of a dark demand to me. But two thoughts on this. Number one is that they do agree to it. Right. So but you might say, well, they will.

OK, but like by that standard, let's do an extreme example. Should we allow like a boss to say, like, you have to sleep with me at this job or you can't work here? That's an agreement. Well, no, you would probably quit, right? Well, but what if you need to work this job or you'll be homeless or it's paired with a non-compete so you can't work in the same industry?

Sounds awfully Marxist, right? I know. But it's like, well, you must have the job. So think of it the other way, like saying you can't like leave and compete somewhere else. Like, let's let's let's play this out, because I'm less concerned about non-competes. What about NDA's? Like, you could agree NDA's shouldn't be obliterated.

Yeah, I mean, probably not. I mean, that's a lot less restrictive and coercive than I think. Or how about non-disparagements?

Non-disparagement. I think that makes sense, because that is a contract related to your conduct with this employer. Yes.

Whereas a non-compete is essentially saying you it's a coercive impact on your ability to work somewhere else, to leave and do work with another company. Right. But they signed it voluntarily.

I hear what you're saying. Yes. But again, is the FTC going to just shorten the horizon or just get rid of them altogether? I think their idea is to essentially ban them entirely.

I haven't read the exact details of it. I think you can already cover this. A lot of the justification for it is like, oh, they would take your tech and then leave and steal it. But there are other ways to restrict that. You know, you have trademark copyright patent law. All of those things exist already.

Let's take the example for the Google self-driving cars and Uber. Remember that turned into this huge, I don't know if you remember that massive lawsuit. Yes. Yeah. But that was he was under non-compete.

He just broke it. And then it turned into this huge thing. I guess. How do you then enforce it just through trademark? Because a lot of trademark sometimes is the person. That's true.

Because you're trademarking a person. They've been there for a decade. You're pouring into them.

And then they just leave and go to. Yeah. So I guess you see what I'm saying? Yeah. You almost become an asset of the company at that.

Yeah. I guess I'm just I'm always wary of anything that's justified. I'm like, well, it's a contract. Yet the impact of it is to give enormous power to what are already the entrenched established actors. Like there are a ton of contracts that we don't allow. And then to say like, oh, this thing is protected by like the sanctity of contract. And it's the one that says, oh, if you work for this company, you can never leave and still work in the same field. Like the amount of power that gives to someone and like, yeah, they agree to it, but they're the entrenched actor. And so you get a cyclical thing where like, oh, you can only work at this one monopolistic company if you're in this field. And the reason that they're the ones who are the monopoly in this field is because they force everyone who works for them to sign a contract that they can ever form a competitor. Yeah. Google or like, okay, if I work at Salesforce.

Oh yeah. Or any, any company or like, let's say an AI company. And you're like, I work at this AI company and I sign a contract that I can never leave and work at a different AI company or start my own AI company. And to say like, you can't sign, like to say that you can sign a contract that restricts your future freedom of action that sharply.

I think some nuance is important. Let's say that you buy a company and you're purchasing, you know, the assets and the essentially the contracts. Can't you do a non-compete with the CEO so that the CEO doesn't leave and compete against the company? I think that might still be allowed as part of. You agree that that's okay. That would, I think, be reasonable. You give the CEO 50 million bucks and he's going to go turn around and compete against you. That would be reasonable, I think. And I think that might still be allowed in the FTC. I'd have to double check. Like making a non-compete as part of like a purchase agreement or something large like that, as opposed to a condition of employment is that you just can't leave.

It feels very dark to me to say that that level of power. Ryan says C levels were not part of this. That's what I'm thinking, because I mean, at least from, I mean, just here locally in Phoenix, there was a huge non-compete lawsuit with restaurants, a huge restaurant tour, got his whole thing bought. And like, you can't do any new restaurants. He's like, yeah, I am. And he went and did restaurants.

It was like, and they paid him like hundreds of millions of dollars for his restaurants. And so you could see where that tension is. Yeah. I feel like at the least, like getting rid of non-competes doesn't kill businesses and they still have a lot of startups in California without them, despite California being a horrible state in a million other ways for business. So probably not the end of the world to get rid of them. I understand why people would oppose them. I also understand, or would oppose the ban. But I don't think it necessarily should be a knee jerk thing.

I think you can make a pro capitalism, pro free market argument for restricting them. That said, I do think Congress should pass a law rather than Lena Kahn coming out and just saying, I'm going to blow this up. I mean, I just don't trust the administrative state because they're going to go after NDAs next. Yeah. And NDAs, I think, should be protected without a doubt. Would you agree? Yeah, I think so.

You think so? Well, it's all silly now where we get this song and dance where you'll have an NDA and then someone will come out and say like, I want to say something, but I can't because of the NDA. And they do that stupid PR assault to force them to waive the NDA. And it's like, well, why do the NDAs exist then?

Yeah, I guess, but they're still not breaking it. They would do that with Weinstein. I think Weinstein was like pressured into waiving all of his NDAs or something. Did he? I don't know if he did. Someone did.

So you've had celebrities be pressured into doing it. It's all like BS. Members.charliekirk.com.

That's members.charliekirk.com. Let's get to Vasant, who I'm glad I have my partner here, Blake, to help me through this because I do not know how to answer. I know very little about this. Vasant, thank you for being a member. What's on your mind? Hi. Can you hear me?

Yes, I can. Thank you for being a member. Yeah. Hi. I really like what you do. And your podcasts are very informative.

So I just wanted to start with that. So I had a question regarding your stance on the conflict in Jammu and Kashmir. Obviously, this is an issue that's been debated.

And obviously, this has been an issue that has been brought up by many senators and congressmen and congresswomen in America. Obviously, with me, this is a very important issue to me because my ancestors were actually driven out of their homes in Jammu and Kashmir, and they were victims of Islamist settler colonization. And when I see politicians like Ilhan Omar and many other US politicians saying that India is illegally occupying the land and saying that the US should encourage for the encouragement of the freedom of demonstration and the free will for Kashmiris, it really hits a nerve with me. So I wanted to know what is the conservative talking point on this conflict? And what stance should the US take? And you personally, I know you don't know too much about this conflict, but I want to know what your take on this conflict is. And obviously, who you think the land rightfully belongs to?

Thank you for your support and for that question. So I first I'm going to let Blake just take some time and walk through exactly what we're talking about here. It is not a everyday American topic, but it's a very important one geopolitically.

So, Blake, educate the audience. OK, so he's talking about and feel free to correct me if he's still here, if I screw anything up, because I'm certainly not an expert on it. So Jammu and Kashmir, they're a region in the northern Indian subcontinent. It's a disputed region between India and Pakistan. So it's kind of, like I said, far north kind of near the Himalayas.

It's basically split between them. So about half that territory is currently administered by Pakistan and about half is administered by India. It fits into the wider conflict because there are people in Kashmir who want to be independent. There are people who would like to be part of Pakistan, people who would like to be part of India. It's become a little more fraught recently because I think it had a special legal status in India, where other Hindu Indians and the rest of the country couldn't buy land there, I believe. And they've recently revised that so that they're able to move there and it's a more normal part of India.

Lots of drama. What I would say, my personal kind of take on it is, is a person can have whatever opinion they want on it. I definitely, in the grand scheme of things, like India more than I like Pakistan for a lot of reasons that I think are understandable. I think obvious.

Yeah, and obvious. So by disposition, I guess India is an exciting country. India is an exciting country.

It's going well. I don't know if thriving democracy is like the ideal alternative. They're growing and they're prospering and they're kind of moving in a more pro-US way.

So I like them overall. That said, on the specifics of the Kashmir question, I think this is a classic case of a question the US should not be getting too involved in because it is literally on the other side of the planet. And there are people who care a lot more about it than we ever will. And it's just it's not crucial to US security. And I think the last 40 years of US history have shown us the perils of repeatedly getting invested in territorial disputes on the far side of the planet. Like even, you know, like with Russia, Ukraine, we've never said there is not a right or wrong side in the Russia Ukraine conflict.

I think we're sympathetic towards Ukrainians that they're being invaded and Putin should not have invaded. But I would just say it is not a thing that America should be getting invested in to a massive degree. It gets us you get embroiled in other people's troubles. It gets very morally fraught.

You just get involved in too much stuff. That's my attitude. Just to be clear, if the State Department allows India to defend itself, India will probably be very successful. Yeah, India. India, I think, is a huge country. India is capable of taking care of itself.

Yes. And I wouldn't say they have a great military, but they could if they wanted to. We should be friendly with them. We should continue to cultivate our friendly status with them because I do agree they're more sympathetic than Pakistan.

But I don't think that America should be investing its diplomatic weight in one side of a question that is probably relatively intractable. Thank you for your support. Really appreciate it. Members dot Charlie Kirk dot com. That is members dot Charlie Kirk dot com. Another important component is Pakistan allegedly was supposed to help us with the war in terror, but then they were safe harboring Osama bin Laden.

Like then they maybe sold them out. Like that's one of the conspiracies is that, you know, all of the story of how we found him is fake and Pakistan just said, yeah, there he is. They play habsies. The world is in flames and biodynamics is a complete and total disaster, but it can't and won't ruin my day. Why? Because I start my day with a hot America first cup of blackout coffee. It's one hundred percent America and zero percent grift. Blackout coffee is one hundred percent committed to conservative values from sourcing the beans to the roasting process, customer support and shipping.

They embody true American values and accept no compromise on taste or quality. Look, you've got to check out right now, blackout coffee dot com slash Charlie or use coupon code Charlie for 20 percent off your first order. That is blackout coffee dot com slash Charlie.

Be awake, not woke. That's blackout coffee dot com slash Charlie. Check it out. Promo code Charlie. All right, let's go to Daniel. Daniel, thank you for being a member. What is on your mind?

Yes. Knowing that Jen's Jen excuse me, Jen X and the boomer generation tends to get most collective at churches. If you had a chance to speak at a conference for thousands of church leaders, what topic would you speak on?

Well, I thank you. I would talk about their need to speak about what's happening in the country and why they should be biblical in their approach and be unafraid of being called political. That's what I would say. So I think church leaders need to speak out. They need to be morally clear in these confusing times, resist tyranny and defend liberty.

That is what I would say, definitely. So you have a you have a conference in mind, Daniel? For the first time in a long time, I'm going to the Willow Creek one as an attendee, not as a speaker, but I was curious on what if you were a speaker there, what would you be speaking on? Well, interestingly, I'm so glad you mentioned that.

I grew up in the suburbs of Chicago. I would passively attend Willow Creek Community Church, and I would go to a church and when Bill Hybels was still there, they have their global leadership conference or their summit, which I think is what you're talking about. They have gone very woke, Daniel, as I'm sure you know, and I'm glad you're going, by the way.

You should go there and be salt and light, be influenced, meet as many people as you can, so I'm super thrilled you're going. But they have gone very, very woke, and they did for quite some time, and that's honestly one of the reasons why I think that church fell apart. And Willow Creek is largely responsible for the corporatization of the modern American church. They were, through their global leadership summit, they kind of presented this model like, hey, go borrow a bunch of money, get huge buildings, try to get as many people as possible, you know, dilute the gospel message.

I think it did a lot of damage. So, Daniel, God bless you, man, and send me an email how it goes at that global leadership summit. Really appreciate that.

Members.CharlieKirk.com. How about this one? Charlie, I can't join the call today, but I listen to every single episode. Only Blake, I think, and Andrew can say that. You listen to equality control them all, right? Daniel.

Daisy takes some of them, but I guess I do it worse. Yeah. So this person listens to more than you. Daniel.

It's quite possible. A huge conversation happening right now about celebrities going to the Met Gala and showing off their wealth while everyday Americans can't pay for their groceries. While conservative, I can see the issue of, quote, the rich get richer while the poor get poorer.

Where should we stand? Well, so look, I don't think as a conservative it should be a contradiction. You have to just be very clear, first and foremost, that that is the perfect image of the modern left and the super rich oligarchs and the government dependent poor. That is their coalition. Super rich oligarchs and the government dependent poor. Tickets were $75,000 apiece, is what I'm told, to the Met Gala. $75,000 apiece.

Not everyone had to pay, but some were invited and some people did indeed pay. But this is important. The American middle class is being destroyed. According to Zillow.com, it required to buy a home about $75,000 a year when Donald Trump entered his presidency.

I'm approximating. Now it's over $120,000 to $130,000 a year to purchase a home. Everything is more expensive and the middle class is being destroyed largely because of how much money we're printing. You have a thought on that, Blake? I think it's I don't think it's immoral for rich people to be rich and to do things, but I would say Tucker's talked about this, too. It's sort of from a prudential point of view, which is if you're going to live it up, you should be aware of what the state of your country is and how it will appear to people. And if you have extreme lavish over the top displays, opulence, displays of wealth in a country that has a sense of being in decay, that will, the public is going to take it like a jaundiced eye towards that. They're going to not like it. People can be proud like in a more healthy society, people are kind of like they enjoy the lives of like the rich and famous and they, you know, they'll be OK with it.

But if their sense is like these people are living great and laughing at my expense and yeah, and they're just getting really rich at my expense, they're going. That's how you get this like pre-revolutionary ferment where people, which is what's going to burn it all down. And we don't want to burn it all down.

That's the important thing. And also, I think we have to be honest, like how are some of the how is the wealth gravitating upwards? And it's not it's not in natural ways. It is artificial government intervention that's happened.

For sure. And that that makes it worse, too. It's sort of that's why Teddy Roosevelt was a great president. It was that he could look at an America that was fabulously wealthy and getting wealthier. But say, if we don't curb excesses, there will be like a revolution in America.

And we don't want that because America is a great country. And I think you want to have that attitude with your wealthy people that they should think we can live well, but we have some obligations towards the country. And some of that can be as simple as at least some of the wealth should be very publicly directed. And I think one thing that stinks with our rich people is like their charitable endeavors are often kind of uninspiring. Like, you know, you just feed $500 million into this left-wing activist group that then like erects encampments in your cities. Andrew Carnegie spent a billion dollars building libraries, and they're all so beautiful that, you know, 80% of them are still standing today and they're city halls.

My city hall in Sioux Falls when I was growing up was a Carnegie library that they converted. And I think you'd want wealthy people to put a lot of cash into beautifying things that the public can appreciate. And I think America feels really great when we're able to see that when you have the most beautiful things in your society are open to the public, accessible to the public.

Yeah. And in addition to that, that's why I have so much respect for Elon Musk, is that Elon Musk has deployed a huge portion of his net worth for something that is not just Met Gala, you know, opulence, right? Again, I have no problem with if you earned your money, spend it how you want, but be very careful about the message it sends to people if they're struggling and then they're in pain when you are doing nothing to save them. And Elon Musk buying Twitter and liberating it has been one of the great like charitable moral goods. Like, he's not making money off.

He might in the future, by the way. But it's a huge moral good for humanity. Massive.

Massive. OK, everybody, let's get to the next member questioner. Shelly, you do a great job responding to questions of presenting your points, Charlie, to liberal college kids. But I noticed that some of them are also pretty good at debating you.

I agree. The question is, are you seeing changes for the better in students on campus where you have visited these past few years? Do you see college students becoming more and more open, more and more conservative as a result of your visits?

Yes, we've been saying we've got to just keep repeating. The data is actually really improving and we are doing really well. But, Blake, I think it's important that you visit a lot of college campuses. Some of the students are far better informed than your average 50-year-old. Would that be fair? Yeah, I think when they get really involved and really invested, they have the time.

And yeah, they're they don't they don't talk in the world and they don't have to pay a mortgage. Yeah. And so I we have to be on our feet, little nimble. Yeah.

On every possible topic. We've got to be ready. And some of them are just obviously like they're political operatives. We had a guy with the Biden campaign, I believe. Literally.

Washington. And he was he was really like bombarding us with some stuff. That was some back and forth.

Yes. But also, it's not just that college students are getting more conservative, it's that they're getting more openly conservative. Like when you were doing your table at Washington, we had quite a group of guys who were just like directly standing against the Antifa goons. We were seeing that trend. And like, you know, they'll, for lack of a better term, dialogue with them as opposed to they won't just stand in their way or scream at them.

They'll kind of like ridicule them or make ideological points. And you just I don't think people were brave enough to do that in 2019, 2020. There was more of a fever over the country that made that feel dangerous. And it still is somewhat dangerous. But people are standing up for themselves a lot more. And I like that.

I agree. And yes, some of the college students are super informed. And so, by the way, some people say, oh, Charlie, just go and debate colleges. First of all, I'll debate anybody. I've debated PhDs. I've debated, you know, professors and politicians. But your average college kid sometimes actually is more into it than an adult.

They have more time and they have more energy at times. OK, let's get the next question here. Let's go to Charlie, new member here. Since 25 years, illegal alien with a fairly big business and it's great America. I live and breathe it every day. Really worried about America would be a lot cheaper and closer for me, for my family to move to Russia.

But I picked up to America for all the reasons you're fighting for every day. Question with all the polling data and predictions for the electoral votes with the Nebraska issue. Will it get changed?

I've said before, we feel very good about Nebraska. Ask me in like end of June. What did the polling look like? Blake, this can be a great question for you. What did the polling look like in 2020 compared to where it is now? So that's a great question. Donald Trump in May of 2020 was really in a hole.

He was really down and he came back towards the end. I'm furious. I'm looking at it now.

So just as an example, a legal alien, I'm sorry. But yes, I'm just looking now at the Real Clear Politics average, for example, for Wisconsin in 2020. And the Real Clear average when we were like going into Election Day was that Biden was up 6.7 points.

There were individual polls. Reuters had him up 10. New York Times had him up 11. CNBC had him up 8. And the final result officially was that Biden won it by 0.7. So was off by 6 points in Trump's favor. Still allegedly lost, but huge polling error. So now if we check, let me check. RCP Wisconsin chose Trump up average.

Sorry, I got to look this crap up. It shows Trump up like 4 points in Wisconsin, 0.5 points in Wisconsin on the average of 5 in Arizona. Now, I want to be clear, though.

There's a chance, this is where I struggle. Trump almost always overperforms the polls. But have the polls been getting better? They have. And that's important. They're sampling rules more.

You know what I'm saying? A concern I have very often, I think conservatives have learned to be combative towards polls. And the attitude you'll see is they'll believe the polls are, they're like a form of propaganda, like they're structured to like, oh, they want to send them out. Like, for example, they'll rig the poll.

So it looks like Biden's way up to demoralize us. And then now maybe they're swinging our way because they want us overconfident. There's a lot of different polling outfits. My belief is most pollsters who are not like affiliated with a campaign, because there are polls like that, but most normal polls that you're going to see on reported in the news, they are trying to get it right. They want to be accurate because that is what their professional reputation is staked on. There are fake polls at times, though. There are fake polls and polling error is real. But I do believe that they consider it embarrassing that they whiffed so bad in 2020 in many states. Are they overcorrecting? And they could be overcorrecting. However, a new Quinnipiac poll shows Biden up 6 in Wisconsin.

Exactly. And they are a liberal leaning pollster on average. But it shows it too close to call if the third party candidates are included.

So it's all over the place. This race is a hard one to pull. But let's forget. Let's just like kind of forget all the polling.

I think it's fair to say they're most worried that Trump is going to get hot and hotter and hotter closer to the election. He finishes really well. Yes. And he did. He finished well in 16.

He finished well in 20, meaning he just like gets on message. And those last two weeks, it's like this feeling that they just can't contain. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us as always. Freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com. Thanks so much for listening and gobble. For more on many of these stories and news
Whisper: medium.en / 2024-05-13 06:23:53 / 2024-05-13 06:44:14 / 20

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