RADIOJuly 05, 2022

Yes, it IS possible for Americans to unite. Here’s how.

Each day it seems Americans become more and more divided along political party lines. But there IS still a way for Americans to unite. Riaz Patel, TV producer and founder of ‘ConnectEffect,’ tells Glenn it’s all about disregarding the ‘screen world’ and instead listening and learning from other humans’ first-hand experiences. It’s important to ‘reset humanity’ and fight the agenda being forced onto us all through our phones. Patel tells Glenn about his new project which does just that and about the amazing progress he’s witnessed thus far…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I want to welcome back a very good friend of the program. Somebody, if you're a long-time listener of this program. Somebody you might remember Riaz Patel. He's now the founder of Connect Effect. He is a TV producer. Two-time Emmy nominee. Couldn't get it done, huh?

RIAZ: Both times. And she wasn't even there.

GLENN: But he's also a guy that I think we met in 2015, or 2016?

RIAZ: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And there was shooting. You're a Muslim. You're a gay man. And there was a shooting, and you were -- you know, the media was telling you, this is really. This is what's happening. And then Trump came along. And you were like, okay. I got to know what's really going on. And you went up to Alaska. And said, I just want to meet these people. Because I can't live in a world, if that's what I'm really surrounded by. And you found out, that's not.

RIAZ: Not remotely. Not remotely. The 50 percent of the population is not the cliché that I was led to believe. They're actually human beings.

GLENN: And we had such a great time getting together. I still follow you on Instagram. We chat from time to time.

But the -- the thing that always struck me was how honest you always were. You were really looking for information. You weren't trying to prove anything. You just wanted to know what the truth was.

And how different our understanding of the news was, because you lived in your world.

RIAZ: Yes.

GLENN: And I lived in my world. And I remember putting things up in the chalkboard. And saying, none of those things happened.

RIAZ: At all.

GLENN: Big stories to conservatives. It was weird.

RIAZ: And it used to be the strangest thing, when I would come here to visit you, that I would get on the plane, and leave the LA feeds, and arrive here, completely different news. Completely different stories, like this is insane. Two different worlds.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. So you've been trying to bridge the gap.

RIAZ: Yeah.

GLENN: For a long time. And we talked about shows, where you could actually talk. Things have only gotten worse.

RIAZ: Yes. Absolutely.

And I think that was the big problem, was the screen world, and I called the screen world. All the edits that magically appear for us on our phone is the screen world, is not the real world. It's a very particularly point of view, and very highly edited. And to me, for seven years, what is the truth? And every time I would bring people together, seven people, ten people. Fifty people. In Alaska, Dallas, New York. They were never the clichés that I was led to believe.

And I constantly was wondering, how do they connect, and why wouldn't they connect?

And really, it came down to the power of the screen world is now the way we see the world.

People can be standing in front of us, and we cannot see them, or their humanity, because we see them through the edits that we think we know about them.

GLENN: It's really terrifying.

Because we were talking off the air. Children suicide and depression is off the charts.

RIAZ: Unbelievable.

GLENN: Unbelievable. And I think it's because of this.

There's nothing real. You don't really know people. And covid only made it worse. No real connections going on.

RIAZ: And that's the thing. It's so funny.

Everyone seems to be lacking true authentic connection, and the thing that I realized over seven years, is that true connection is not remotely information-based. Even if we're all living in an information age. That the words we exchange are 7 percent of communication. It's the body language. It's the tone. It's all of those things that create humanity. None of those you get from a screen. You just get the words, which sequentially posting at each other gets us absolutely nowhere fast.

And so I kept trying to think, what is a way to do this? A hard reset. Actually leave people in a room, so that they can see each other. And not see the edits that they think they know about each other. And that took seven years of testing and testing and testing.

GLENN: So how are you going to do this?

RIAZ: So it's called Connect Effect. And what it is -- it's an in-person -- it's an entertainment experience. And it's designed that way, because I reached out to a policy institute, and they said, everything we're doing about bridging and facilitating conversations, is not working. People just show up with more information, and they just keep exchanging it, and no one actually listens. And no one actually learns and is impacted. So how can I get people in a physical room? And we do 50 to 100 people at a time. To really see each other. The people in the room. The real world. And not the screen world. Not see each other through the screen world. It's a hard reset of their humanity.

GLENN: So how do you do that?

Because I would think that you would -- depending on where you are, you would have a lot of conservatives show up. And some very timid liberals. Or a lot of liberals show up. And their timid conservatives.

And you would fight an agenda. You know what I mean?

So how do you -- how do you -- how are you getting that?

RIAZ: The thinking is, the actual Connect Effect, what it is, is this: When you connect with someone in a meaningful, in-person way, in person, human to human, you'll talk, openly and honestly. It's how we met.

When we sat down opposite each other in 2016 and I came with my information, we just looked at each other, and we were like, oh, you're just a human being wants to know.

Once you have that connection, you'll talk openly and honestly. When you talk openly and honestly, you will understand. And that understanding deepens the connection.

That's the connective act. Now people are talking without the connection, and it's just this exchange of information. So they don't talk first.
They sit back. And from the moment the doors open, there's music. There's images on the screen. Two sides of stories, that people have never seen.

Whether it's edits I've seen in the news. Oh, yeah. That's what CNN ran. That's what Fox did side by side. And it constantly says, which edit do you see? Which edit do you not see?

And we're constantly running through history. Here's an edit you do know. And then it's before we even start the program, they're seeing, you're only -- that they're only seeing one edit.

GLENN: And so I would imagine, it's very important to let the audience know, that you're not trying to change them politically.

ROB: Not at all.

GLENN: You're just trying to say, you don't know the whole story, on both sides.

RIAZ: You don't know the whole story. And the whole story doesn't necessarily even matter when you are trying to fix things in your world. You and I did a podcast special a while ago, where we brought seven Americans together to talk about guns.

And --

GLENN: It was so great.

RIAZ: And it just spiraled and spiraled, until the NRA firearms instructor and the Moms Demand Action woman spent time together, made a joke, and suddenly all the defenses were gone. Because they had connected. And they talked openly. And realized they were 90 percent there. When they were all in the room, guarded with their information.

GLENN: Before we started it, we were both concerned, this could be a nightmare.

RIAZ: Absolutely.

GLENN: And by the end, I think the Marxist professor was like, this is great.

RIAZ: Yeah. Yeah. Because they stop seeing each other through screens. And the screens come at each other, all day every day.

And the way the screens work is for attention extraction is what they call it at Google. That's all they're doing. And so whatever you like, they'll send you more of it. If you're angry about this, they'll send you more.

Because the real facts are that anger makes money. The easiest shift to create in the human being is anger. What travels faster than any virus? Fear.

And so if the screens are constantly making you feel the world is burning constantly, then you're never going to be able to connect. But they make cha-ching. Cha-ching, cha-ching. More money the more you're watching.

And so we hard reset, the shared humanity of people in the room.

And it's very interesting, because at some time they start realizing, wait. I was going to say that. But I only know that from a screen. So we tell people, talk about what you know. Did you work on the front line of covid? Great. Tell us about that.

If you didn't, it's your time to sit back and listen. Because you received a screen edit that was designed to make you upset and angry. To look at more. To look at more. To look at more ads. And so I'm trying to get people -- the amazing thing, when people meet in the real world, they're constantly engaging people from what they know from the screen, which has little to no relevance to the person they're talking to.

GLENN: You -- the first one is happening, where? In Orange County?

RIAZ: Orange County, this Saturday. April 30th. I'm working with an organization called Civic Genius.

And I really was -- I was relentless when I was finding a partner that they didn't have a political affiliation. Because I cannot tell someone what the way they should think. I don't live their lives thousands and thousands of days as them.

GLENN: It's actually not the -- I shouldn't say that.

The problem is, people who are trying to tell people what to think.

RIAZ: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Not how to think. What to think. You will believe this. I don't care what side it's on. You believe this, and there's no compromise.

RIAZ: You must believe this. Or you're bad.

GLENN: Bad. That's what's killing us. That's what's killing us.

RIAZ: When you and I met years ago, I came in with this perception of what I thought you were. When I sat, the humanity kicked in, and we were able to talk. All I want, the whole point of this is I just want people fighting in their families. Fighting in their communities. If you can't sit down with the people in your community, to solve your problems. No one wins.

GLENN: So what age-group?

RIAZ: This is mostly 18 and over. But 18 to 80. It can be anyone.

GLENN: Okay. And when you go, do you have to participate, or can you just watch?

RIAZ: You can. So everyone sits, and everything is designed, the way the seats are set up. The way the screen works. It's all highly, highly produced. So everyone sits in this very large -- so there's no hiding in the back.

GLENN: Like an AA meeting.

RIAZ: It's like -- you can't go anywhere. You must stay.

But not everyone speaks, and who speaks is random. It's actually done through a way, inside the pouches. Some people have a chip, and some people don't. And the people who have blue chips have to stand up, and then they have a conversation. It's a way --

GLENN: So you're not speaking to -- I mean, you are speaking in front of the whole group. But you're not speaking and having interaction with the whole group.

RIAZ: No.

GLENN: The whole group is kind of channeling it through different conversations.

RIAZ: Correct. Correct. And we say it's one story told between two worlds. One is the real world. All of us in the room. And the other is all the media we have on the screen. And so the screen plays a large part in it, with edits and media coming at the audience, showing them, well, what is true?

Because if this is true on the screen, it can't be true in the real world. We're constantly juxtaposing the two. And it really ends up being this mind-blowing hard reset.

GLENN: So are you going to have video there? Okay.

Can you return maybe, and show me some video. And give me the results of what this happened.

RIAZ: We can. We actually have two tests on the website. ConnectEffect.us, under testimonials. One, we took women. And we said, if women, once connected, could they solve each other's most deep, challenging questions? So we took these total strangers. Didn't know each other, connected them. And they're reading these unbelievable questions. Like, why am I single my whole life? Why would I draw men that would abuse me?

And the audience helps them find the answer. It's incredible.

GLENN: That's unbelievable.
RIAZ: Because all that happens is, we have a problem. We go to an expert. We have a problem, we go to an expert.

Diagnosis. Medicated. Sometimes we just need the opinions of other people, and social buffering. And that doesn't exist anymore.

So that was one test. The other was at a university. Because we have students at a university, afraid of each other, not just physically, but ideologically. And so we thought, could we take students, once connected after 60 minutes, would they be open to the other side's ideology, and you look at the video, they were. They saw the whole thing differently. And they realized that all these people in the real world, in the room, are not the enemies, that they perceive coming through the edits.

GLENN: So how do you get people to -- I mean, are you just traveling the country. Are you asking for places to host you?

RIAZ: We are.

We are looking for organizations, churches, synagogues, anywhere where people have stopped talking, which is pretty much everywhere.

GLENN: Everywhere.

RIAZ: We're looking. And it's not just led by me.

It's a system that's replicated and designed to be done by many people. The system is called epic.

Forbes described, it was a game changer, a few years ago.

It's a different way of approaching people, that you have to engage through equalization, that's the E.

If I don't look at you as an equal, what are we talking about?

Like, why am I talking to you, if I don't think you're an equal. And beyond that, the P is personalization. I don't care what you read. Because whatever you read, I've got -- you've got stats, I've got stats. You've got articles, I've got articles. Now we go nowhere. What do you know? What have you experienced of racism? What have you experienced of suffering? That's what I need to know, but if you keep bringing -- I kept bridging these conversations. And I had seven people in the room, and 480 opinions. And suddenly Nancy Pelosi was there. Mitch McConnell. And I said, why are they in the room? They certainly won't be helping you fix your problem in the school. Then it's personalization. Then information gathering. The thing I tell people, stop talking about what you know. We know what you know. Ask people, what do I not know?

GLENN: That is -- I think that is one of the real keys to -- if people say, I can't talk to them. Or I want to just -- I need to change their mind. If you're approaching a conversation that way, you are saying to don't, they don't have anything of value, to teach me.

RIAZ: Yes.

GLENN: And when you both exchange that, just the basic thing. And I don't mean stats. I mean you as a person. How do you get there?

As soon as you get there, things change.

RIAZ: I always ask people, why are we not cyclopses? Why do we have two eyes that do the exact same thing? Not even an inch and a half apart? Because that's the only way to see depth and perspective. So I tell people, look at the world, with your view. You need the other view to see the world in two dimensions. You have to know, what you don't know. Constantly coming to TheBlaze, and you and I would sit down, whether we were traveling on a project. And I would learn so much about the world, that I never knew. And vice-versa.

GLENN: Likewise. Likewise.

RIAZ: And it was the only way I saw things with depth, it was no longer a two-dimensional edit. In the screen world. It was three-dimensional in the real world.

GLENN: I was thinking about this a lot lately. We have to wrap up. The Scripture, there must be opposition in all things.

RIAZ: All things. There must be.

GLENN: We don't want to argue. And we have to agree to one side. No. There must be opposition.

RIAZ: Solutions, yes.

GLENN: And to see depth. Riaz. Thank you so much. You can find out more on this. At connecteffect.us. That's connecteffect.us.

Zuckerberg Wants to Give You AI “Friends” … To CONTROL You?

Meta and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg has a new goal: to give lonely Americans AI “friends.” But Glenn sounds the alarm: this must NEVER happen! Glenn explains the hidden danger in Zuckerberg’s seemingly kindhearted plan: “AI cannot, must not, and will never be your friend.” Opening that door will only give Meta insane levels of potential for manipulation and control over you.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let's start with this: Mark Zuckerberg. Good guy. I mean, he brought us Facebook.

And, you know, that is the thing that brought all of us together.

Brought out families together. All the people that we lost touch with.

Oh, the world is so much better now that we have Facebook.

So now, he's got another idea. Could we play the clip of Mark Zuckerberg?

VOICE: There's a stat that I honestly think is crazy. The average American has I think it's fewer than three friends. Three people they consider friends. And the average person has demand for meaningfully more. I think it's 15 friends or something.

I guess there's probably at some point, I'm too busy. I can't deal with more people. But the average person wants more connectivity, connection than they have. So, you know, there's a lot of questions that people ask.

Of stuff like, okay. Is this going to replace kind of in person connections or real life connections?

And my default is that the answer to that is probably no.

I think it -- it -- I think that there are all these things that are better kind of about physical connections, when you can have them.

But the reality is that people just don't have the connection when they feel more alone, a lot of the time, than they would like.

GLENN: Hmm. True.

Now, let me ask you. Is there a time when you don't remember feeling so isolated? When you didn't really feel like I don't have any real friends?

When you didn't -- you had real connections with people, instead of a million connections with people that are your friends, but not really your friends?

Can you think of a time, way back in history?

I mean, probably have to go back to the cavemen, to find a time.

Oh. Before Facebook, and social media!

When we weren't all killing ourself, because we have no meaning.

Now, from the people who brought you kill yourself, because you've been on Facebook too much.

Brings you new AI friends. Oh, this is going to be good.

By the way, you know, that's a crazy stat, I think the average American has, what? Three friends. And they have a capacity for, I don't know. Fifteen or 20. I don't know.

Really think about it right now.

How many true friends, do you have?

How many true friends?

People that when you are down and out, there is nothing -- the whole world is against you!

That that person will actually stand by your side. And go, yeah.

I'm their friend.

And I don't care what you say.

How many? How many do you have?

I think I would count myself lucky if I have three.

Now, I have a lot of consequences.

I have a lot of people who we all think are friends. But as a recovering alcoholic, I've been there.

I've done that. As a recovering alcoholic,
who then also is a conservative and spoke out about the Obama administration, I know who my friends are.
I know who my friends are not.

And I think there's a lot of people that have counterfeit friends.

If you've got. Oh, I've got ten or 15 friends.

Eh.

No, you don't. No, you don't.

I've always grown up thinking, you're lucky, you're lucky, to have three, five, really good friends.

That will walk through anything with you. Do you agree with that, Stu?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: You've never been there.

STU: For you? Oh, God no. But I'm just saying, generally speaking. No. I think -- I mean, you're describing a great friend. You're describing a really --

GLENN: A real friend.

STU: Yeah. Like someone you know and stick around for multiple decades.

GLENN: Yeah, I have lots of friends. You know what I mean? I have millions of Facebook friends.

STU: Right. Those aren't real.

GLENN: Right. And I have lots of friends. But the ones that are there for you always, no matter what, I have family.

And I have family.

STU: Right.

GLENN: And I have a handful of friends. I would consider you one of those.

STU: Thank you. I would as well.

GLENN: Why?

Remember, I have a drinking problem.

STU: Yeah. A lot of brain cells killed to make that decision.

But I think that you -- yes. I think the only thing that I think I'm drilling down a little bit on to try to understand. When you say, well, I have a lot of friends.

In a way, I think that's what Zuckerberg is talking about.

It's not even necessarily a great friend that you have for multiple decades. And can count on at any time.

Just the mid-level consequences, are drying up for a lot of people.

GLENN: Yeah. And why is that?

Why is that?

Because we don't talk to each other anymore.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Because of social media.

You know, when this generation says, I don't know.

I just think it's weird. I'm just now in a bar someplace.

And some stranger comes up to me and wants to strike up a conversation. I'm like, hello, weirdo. I don't know!

You think it's less weird to go online?
When people can fake everything!

Thank you, Mark Zuckerberg.

But no thanks. Okay.

STU: And they're just -- to build up on this point for one second.

There's a study that came out, the last 20 years, of how much time do you spend socializing with the people.

Again, that's not with your best friends.

This is just socializing with anyone, a human.

Every single group. Every single group has massive drops.

GLENN: Massive.

STU: Massive drops. Just give you some examples.

Ages. Fifteen to 24-year-olds. Thirty-five-point down.

In 20 years. 35 percent. So a typical 15-year-old, as compared to what they are, in 2003 and 2025, where were the two measurement years?

They're spending 35 percent less time, with other human beings.

GLENN: Okay. Hang on just a second. Can you please stop distracting me? Because I'm trying to figure out why our kids are killing themselves.

STU: No, it's really hard.

GLENN: It's very hard to figure out.

STU: To understand.

And this is the coup de grâce of this entire study, which is, the typical female pet owner spends more time actively engaged with her pet, than she spends face-to-face contact with her friends of her own species.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: That is unbelievable -- not like you're in the same house as your cat.

Right? No. More face-to-face time with your cat!

GLENN: And I've got news for you. If you think your cat is your friend, wait until you die, and your cat is trapped in the house with you and you have no friends to check. They will eat your face.

STU: They will still have a use for you.

GLENN: Yeah. They will have a use foy.

STU: Not the other way around.

GLENN: Okay. Here's why I'm bringing this up today.

This is a lie, that is going to be sold to you, like crazy. And it's going to be wrapped in a beautiful, shiny package. And it's going to have from Mark Zuckerberg and others like him, on the tag.

They want you to believe, that AI and bots can be your friends.

The Conclave: Will the Next Pope Be Conservative, Progressive, or an 'Anti-Pope'?

The Conclave to elect the Catholic Church’s next Pope has begun. But will the next Pope be “conservative” and orthodox, will he follow in Pope Francis’ footsteps and be more friendly to leftist and globalist ideas, or will he be an “anti-Pope,” as some Catholics are claiming Francis was? Glenn speaks with LifeSiteNews co-founder and CEO, John-Henry Westen, who reviews the most likely candidates for the papacy and why he believes the “anti-Pope” claims against Francis are not ungrounded.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN:

Did the New York Times Just Admit It Curates Your Truth?

A recent New York Times hit piece is a perfect example of why many Americans no longer trust the newspaper. Glenn compares the piece, which criticizes “The MartyrMade Podcast” host Darryl Cooper’s revisionist history, with the New York Times’ own “1619 Project,” written by Nikole Hannah Jones. Glenn disagrees with both people about major historical events. But the Times, with its elitist hypocrisy, pushed Jones’ attempt to frame America as a racist nation since its inception as unquestionable truth. “I’m not defending [Cooper or Jones],” Glenn says. “I’m defending the idea that We the People decide what’s true, and that takes work and curiosity…The minute you let somebody else decide what you’re allowed to hear, you have already surrendered your freedom to think.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I want to take on something else that I don't know. Maybe I should just keep my big, fat mouth shut.

Because I think this one will piss off everybody. But it's the truth. There was a story in the New York Times. The podcaster asking for you to side with history's villains. It was in the New York Times. Let me read something.

Darryl Cooper is no scholar. But legions of fans, many on the right, can't seem to resist what he presents as hidden truths.

All of a sudden, everyone was coming for Darryl Cooper. There were the newspaper columnists. The historians. The Jewish groups. Repugnant says the chairman of Yadveshev (phonetic), Israel's Holocaust museum in a statement.

Even the Biden White House released a statement, calling him a Holocaust denier who spreads Nazi propaganda. So it was for a time for Mr. Cooper. One of the most popular podcaster in the country, to do what he does best. Hit record.

In a special on his history program, Martyr Made. Mr. Cooper addressed the controversy, which had exploded out of September 2nd appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show.

The podcast started by the former Fox News host. At first, Mr. Cooper, a gifted historic storyteller, but not a trained historian, defended the claims he had made on Mr. Carlsen's show. One that Winston Churchill was the chief villain of the war. Ridiculous. Not by implication. Adolf Hitler.

The two -- and two, that millions had died in Nazi-controlled Eastern Europe because Nazis had not adequately planned to feed them. Okay. Not true.

He then said, the story goes on to say, I don't know if we retracted some of that stuff. This emotional ventriloquism is part of Mr. Cooper's approach and appeal. On TikTok, a fan praised him as one of the best historians of our time, because he tries to go out of his way, to understand the perspective of everyone involved in a situation.

These critics have probably helped make Mr. Cooper bigger than ever. He's been the most subscribed to history newsletter on Substak. One spot ahead of the evident economic historian, Adam HEP Toos in the wake of the Rogan interview. Martyrmade. Blah, blah, blah.

Okay. So they go on and on and on. To talk about how this just can't stand. I mean, we've got to -- there's got to be some sort of filter. And, you know, Joe Rogan just can't have on, whoever he wants to have on. That's the problem!

Is it? New York Times. Is that the problem?

Hmm, that's really interesting.

Now, let me just look and -- and let me just look in the past here, and see if we've had this exact same problem, with anybody else. Because the person that came to mind was not Darryl Cooper, but Nicole Hannah Jones. Because I think those two are the same coin, and the coin is counterfeit.

Just opposite sides of the same coin. The martyr made podcast spins a tale of grievance and distrust. And it's wrapped in enough fact to keep it plausible.

But there are some facts in there. Okay.

Jones, she did the 1619 Project.

She did the same thing in reverse. Except, I think she's actually worse.

I mean, because I think she made up almost everything in that. She recasts American history. As racist from the very inception of the country.

Neither one of them is telling the whole truth. Neither one of them. Neither wants to, I think. They're both in the business of narrative, and not history.

So am I. But I tried to be fair.

The real problem is not these two.

Honestly, it's the New York Times.

Because in their Sunday styles, write-up on Cooper.

The Times poses as a concerned observer.

Wary of growing influence among the disaffected right.

Why are we disaffected. Why is the right disaffected?

We're disaffected because you have tried to take our country from us.

Everything that we believe. Our history.

Our values. Our traditions. And you've tried to denigrate them. And destroy them, every step of the way.

And you've done them with one lie, right after another.

Okay?

Why are they framing him. Not with facts. But with suspicion.

Not because he's -- dishonest or not dishonest. But because he's popular. They clutch their pearls, because he has an audience. And only the New York Times can have that you audience.

But where that was concern, when they did -- when they gave an audience to Nicole Hannah Jones.

And gave her a Pulitzer for a project now so discredited by the very historians that are now talking about Cooper!

Where was the caution when they declared that 1619, not 1776, was the true founding of the nation? They didn't question her authority. They didn't say, well, she's not a historian. They printed it. In fact, they taught it, and endorsed it. They platformed it in schools!

That's different than anything that Joe Rogan is doing. They platformed it in schools.

So let's be clear. Okay?

I think both Cooper and Jones are wrong.

They may have points worth considering.

But I think that they get it fundamentally wrong, in a few places.

They are looking at facts to sell the story.

And not necessarily reveal the truth.

Now, maybe I'm being too cynical.

But that's the way I see it. And I'm not condemning either one.

I'm condemning all of those on the left, or the right, that are now doing the same thing that the New York Times did with -- with Cooper, but didn't do with Anna Nicole Jones. Only one of those two was lauded by the New York Times, as legitimate. And a necessary corrective, even though, it was all a lie! Made up!

So that's what -- when I'm -- I'm reading that op-ed in the New York Times.

I can't take the -- oh, my gosh. The hypocritical nature of it. Just, blood shoots out of my eyes.

Because that's what the New York Times is actually saying. Don't you little people understand. We must decide what stories are acceptable. Not you!

Not somebody like Joe Rogan. We will decide. Which distortion are his virtuous and which ones are dangerous. Not you.

We get to choose the false prophets that get a column, which -- and which ones are called conspiracy theorists. We, at the New York Times, we in the media!

And athat is the problem! This isn't about the authors. Okay. First Amendment gives him a right to say whatever they want.

You may not like. You don't like it, stop listening.

Well, but other people might listen. Yeah. Well, other people might listen.

Maybe we should pay more attention to our education in our schools. Maybe we should pay more attention, so we don't become somebody that is a dummy, themselves. And are -- because this is the problem!

We don't have a press that exposes lies anymore. We have a press that curates the lies.

I really think this is why I started collecting -- you know, we have now, the third largest collection of founding indictments, in the American journey experience.

Along with David Barton's wall builders.

It is -- it's only behind the national archives. And the library of Congress.

Most people don't know it. Because, you know, we don't talk about it yet.

Beginning in '26. We will be making a big deal out of it.

We also have the largest collection of pilgrim era artifacts and documents in the world.

The largest. So I can tell you what happened in Jamestown in 1619.

I can tell you this, the ship that Hannah HEP Nicole Jones talks about. There were no slaves on that ship.

How do I know?

We have the manifest!

No slaves. Hmm. That seems problematic, doesn't it?

And the Mayflower did not launch a system of slavery.

In fact, they fought against it.

We -- this is so crazy.

What the Pilgrims did against slavery was remarkable.

Remarkable. When a slave shipbuildingsly gave into their port, it was -- slavery was against the law. They called it man stealing.

It was against the law. As soon as the slave came into port. You could smell the slave ship. They knew exactly what it was. They marched and up arrested the captain of the ship.

They put anymore irons. And put him in jail.

And these people, who were already paying 15 percent of everything they make. These poor people.

15 percent of everything they make, to a king they can't be they despise. But they paid it, because they wanted to just stay alive.

They took up a collection from each other. Not outside. From each other.

Got a new captain. Refueled. Restocked the ship. And sent those people. Those slaves back to Africa, so they could be free!

That's who our pilgrims were. Don't believe me? You don't have to take my word for it.
We have the evidence. Please, you know, the longest running treaty with Native Americans happened with our Pilgrims. And you know who broke it? Not the white man. It was the Native Americans! And you know why?

Because after years and years of the Pilgrims and the Native Americans getting along, Christianity was starting to seep into their culture. And they needed to go to war with the tribe. And the war that the way they used to fight it, the Native Americans, it was okay to enslave your enemy.

In fact, you needed to.

You could torture them, after you won!

Just to make a point. And then you would enslave anybody you wanted.

And Christianity said, no. You can't do either one of those things.

And so the native Americans, that were part of this tribe, that were and friends under this treaty, with the Pilgrims. They started telling their chief. You know, we can't do these things.

And the chief got so pissed. Because he was like, we're fighting a war.

We fought it like they always fought it.

That they broke the treaty. Did you know that?

No. They were just horrible. We stole the land.

Ay-yi-yi. Did America live up to its ideals?

No! Has anybody, ever?

Have you? Has the pope? Has anybody really lived up to their ideals all the time?

No! But you have ideals, and that's what matters.

By the way, on the other side, I also happen to own a few original Nazi documents, from the actual perpetrators. I've got documents from the engineer that actually calculated how much Zyklon B it would take to murder a room full of Jews, okay?

It wasn't because they didn't want to -- they didn't have enough food.

This was calculated. I have the final prescription signed by Dr. Mengele, for a thousand liters of lumen that will for the so-called children's hospital. That's how the right was killing the undesirables in the children's hospital.

They didn't do it in a frenzy. It wasn't a riot. It wasn't out of desperation. It was silence out of lab coats, and beauracrats and experts signing off, and the press like the New York Times refusing to say a word about it. The scariest people are not the ones in the streets. They weren't. They were the ones with titles. With offices, with press credentials.

They were the ones with the doctorates.
They were the people who decided what could be published.

Who could be punished. What could be known? What could be said?

And that's the danger that we're staring down, right now. Not from cringe theorists on a podcast. Not even from overzealous academics with a Pulitzer.

But from the institutions that bless one distortion, and condemn the other.

Not based on truth. But based on usefulness.

Is it useful to our side?

I just want you to know. This is my stance on this. and make this very, very clear.

The First Amendment does not exist to protect comfortable speech. It doesn't exist to protect Cooper, as opposed to Jones. It exists to protect both of them!

It protects uncomfortable points of view.

Things you do not like to hear. And disagreement. It protects people who are absolutely wrong, and even those who are lying!

It protects the process, so you can figure it out. There is no licensed priesthood in our country.

You know, that are -- the priesthood of truth-tellers. No official ministry of facts.

That's where countries go wrong. The Times should be exposing both sides of these stories.

Just like I'm doing.

The distortions of the right, and the left.

But instead, they become exactly what they've warned us about.

A newspaper that prints dogma, and not dialogue.

And the real problem here: No.

The real solution here is you. Jefferson warned that a man who reads nothing but newspapers.
Sorry. A man who reads nothing is better informed than a man who only reads the newspaper. Okay? I would say, the newspaper is today's social media.

Man who reads nothing is more well-educated than a man who just only reads social media.

But today we might say, better to be ignorant than confidently misled by trusted media.

They see themselves not as a watch to go. But as a shepherd. And we are the sheep.

So I am not defending either one.

I am defending the idea that we, the people. Not the institutions. Not the elites. Not the New York Times.

Not Joe Rogan.

You decide what's true. And that takes work and that takes curiosity. Maybe the other guy is wrong.

I don't know. Maybe I don't have the whole story either. I don't know.

Look it up. Because the minute you let somebody else decide, what you're allowed to hear, you have already surrendered your freedom to think!

What Christian Movies Can Learn from Serial Killer Films

Christian movies can learn a whole lot from serial killer murder mysteries, The Daily Wire’s Andrew Klavan tells Glenn. While Christian films tend to have good messages, they don’t often touch on the dark realities of this fallen world we live in – realities that even the Bible addresses through the stories of Cain and Abel and many others. Instead, Klavan argues, he gets more biblical truths out of movies like “Halloween” and “The Silence of the Lambs” and books like “Crime and Punishment” than he does films like “God’s Not Dead.” Klavan tells Glenn how he finds God in the literature of darkness, a topic he further delves into in his new book, “The Kingdom of Cain.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Andrew Klavan. Host of the Andrew Klavan program. The Andrew Klavan Show.

How are you, sir?

ANDREW: I'm good. Good to see you.

GLENN: Good to see you. I don't think I've seen you out of your element ever.

ANDREW: Yes, I've been many times to the studio.

GLENN: Have you? Well, they were memorable.

ANDREW: I get this reaction a lot.

GLENN: No. I just love you. I love you. And I got to tell you, the best compliment I could give you, your son is remarkable.

ANDREW: He is remarkable. He is.

GLENN: I hope some day, somebody will say that by my children. Really remarkable.

You and your wife are amazing parents.

ANDREW: Oh, well, thank you.

GLENN: So tell me about the Kingdom of Cain, and talk down to me.

ANDREW: It's a really simple book, and very entertaining, because it's about the movies that we all love.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. He says this. Let me read this to you, Stu, and see if you understand what this is.

STU: The Kingdom of Cain looks at three murders in history, including the first murder. Cain's killing of his brother Abel. And at the art created from imaginative engagement, from those horrific events by artists ranging from Dostoyevsky to Hitchcock. To make beauty out of the world, as it is shot through with evil and injustice and suffering. It is the task, not just of the artist, but Klavan argues of every life rightly lived.

Examining how the transformation occurs in art. Grants us a vision of how it could happen in our life. What is this about?

STU: I don't know what you're missing.

ANDREW: I will tell you, I'm a crime writer. Right? I get this letter all the time. Constantly. It says, you call yourself a Christian.

That part is true, and yet you write about horrific things. You right about murder.

Prostitutes and gangsters, and all this stuff.

Why do you do that?

And the reason is very simple. I believe that God is a central fact of reality. And I believe that any artist who speaks truthfully about reality, will speak about God.

And so what I did. I took three murders. Three very famous murders.

I showed how they inspired works of art. Over and over and over again.

They're -- not just one work of art. But they kept coming back, inspiring other works of art. And how those works of art actually speak about something, that happens to a society, when it begins to lose its faith. As our society has certainly done.

You know, and they chart those works of art, and some of them are like the stupidest little horror movie.

And yet, the guy who is making that horror movie understood what he was talking about.

And can show you. If you go back, for instance, and watch a slasher movie. Like Halloween, which is a very scary movie.

It's actually about the fall of the end of faith. And how it destroys sexual responsibilities.

So it takes place in the suburb. Have you seen it?

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Yeah. I have seen it.

ANDREW: Where there are no moms. And the dads are very weak.

And this knife-wielding crazy man comes back. And basically preys on kids having sex while nobody is watching.

And it's a very, very stark picture. I bet if you asked the director what he was doing, he would tell you that. It's right in the movie, when he see that. But you have to be watching this.

The thing is, these movies are -- not just movies. But novels.

The arts are -- really reveal the conscience of a culture.

GLENN: Yes.

ANDREW: And so taking the way they look at murder, tells us things that are bad about our culture.

But it also tells us about ways we want to go in the future.

The role, for instance, of psychiatrists in -- in these films.

Films. Most of these films are based on murder, committed by Ed Dean in the 1950s, a guy who was constant. Who used to kill women.

Right?

And then dress up in their bodies. Just like in Silence of the Lambs. That inspired Psycho.

It inspired a really good horror movie called the Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

Even though it's a crazy title. It's actually a good movie. The Silence of the Lambs. All of these movies grow out of that one murder.

And what it's about? It's about confusion. It's about sexual. About gender. You know, we don't see that going around nowadays. In fact, it's everywhere. In fact, these movies were made in the 1950s, '60s, '70s, and '80s and on. And so they were predicting, as art often does, what was going to happen, and explaining why.

GLENN: So do you think Alford Hitchcock knew that this was coming? Or he was just a good storyteller?

ANDREW: You are a good story teller. Who was it? T. S. Eliot said a great poet writes himself, and in writing himself, he writes his time.

And I think that that's what happens. These artists basically bring something out of themselves. But it reveals where we are all are. And it reveals where we are going. If you see where we are, you can tell where we're going.

That's why the book does not just concentrate on the darkness. It actually says. What do you do?

How do you react? Now that you know what's happening. How do you react to those things in a creative, joyful way?

Because this is -- the Bible doesn't say things will be great. The Bible says. Yeah.

GLENN: That's not the main point.

ANDREW: Being crucified. And at the same time, it says, rejoice ever more.

GLENN: Right.

ANDREW: So one of the things that really bothers me about Christian movies.

Is they don't really represent life.

If you do a Christian movie, that has real things in it, you get slammed.

Why would you put it in?

Why was there sex? Why was there murder?

One of the major influences that turned me to Christ, when I was 19 years old. That took three decades to kick in.

But it was reading Crime and Punishment. About an axe murderer. And about a prostitute who basically turns this axe murderer's life around.

If you walked into a Christian bookstore today.

And say, can I have that book about the axe murderer and the hooker? Yeah, they would look at you like you were nuts. Because Dostoyevsky was a great artist and a great Christian.

One of the truly deep and interesting Christians in history.

He revealed something about the philosophies that were rising up at that time.

And that are still with us today. And the philosophies that later became spoken out by Nietzsche. And Nietzsche affected all of the leftist philosophers that you and I have loved so much. And have done so many good things for our survival.

GLENN: So let's pretend somebody didn't read that by Dostoyevsky or whatever his name is.

And tell us the story -- and tell us the story. And exactly what -- what he was teaching.

ANDREW: Well, the idea is God is dead.

And therefore, instead of having this horrible Christian philosophy. That is nice to the poor. And the weak, and has charity. And compassion.

We need strong special men. Like Napoleon, for instance. Who will make their own law.

And this man, in this story. Crime and Punishment says, well, if I can make my own law, I can murder somebody.

And it will be a sin. It won't be wrong.

And then he actually accomplishes this murder.

And finds a way. Oh, wait. I've actually shattered the moral order. And now my life is spiraling out of control.

Now, Nietzsche wrote his philosophy, which is the exact philosophy in his book.

After Dostoyevsky wrote the novel, and then his philosophy inspired two murderers in America, named Leopold and Lowe. This was called the crime of the century. The crime of the 20th century.

GLENN: I don't remember it.

ANDREW: I know, nobody remembers it now, but it was one of the biggest crimes of the century. It inspired countless movies and television shows.

It was two kids, they were -- they were rich, gay Jewish kids in the suburbs.

GLENN: What year?

ANDREW: This is 19 -- I want to say 30 -- 30 or 40.

GLENN: Okay.

ANDREW: Yeah. It was the '30s. I'm sorry.

And they decided, well, we're Superman. Like Nietzsche. They read Nietzsche. And they thought, yes. This is what we want to be.

One of them. We will commit the perfect murder, to show we could do it.

They took a kid at random, who they know, and killed them.

GLENN: This is Rope.

ANDREW: Exactly. Exactly. And Rope became the Hitchcock film. And also inspired Compulsion, which is another movie.

Almost a true movie about it. Pops up again and again.

Two people who said, we will commit the perfect murder. Because we're superior.

If you look for it, you will find it in one story after another.

And it's based on the idea, that there's no God. And therefore, anything is permissible, and strong men have to make the rules.

GLENN: That's one of the best movies out of Hitchcock.

Nobody even knows it. Great movie from Hitchcock. And great movie with Jimmy Stewart and just really -- and disturbing.

ANDREW: Yeah, and written -- the original play was written by the guy who also wrote a play called Gaslight, which is where we get the word gaslighting.

So I talk all about these works of art. These works and movies. And listen, I think it's an entertaining book, Glenn.

GLENN: I love your work. I love your work. Most people, if you don't know who Andrew Klavan is.

You've written movies. I mean, you've written just some thrilling novels.

And novels that have been made into movies. And I'm a huge, huge fan.

But, I mean, you know, you are talking to mice here.

ANDREW: I try to just make it about things that people like and enjoy.

GLENN: Yeah. So what is -- what is the lesson that we learn from -- from all of this?

ANDREW: Well, I think the most important lesson, if I can call it that, in the book. Is that the beauty has something to do with the answer to evil.

You know, one of the things that keeps people from believing in God. They say, there's so much evil in the world.

How can a good God, allow this evil to exist?

And at the end of the book, the last third of the book. Which is a very personal statement about what I do, to basically live joyfully in the world, that I can see is evil.

It ends with looking at the statue of Michelangelo. Which is one of the most beautiful works --

GLENN: Beautiful.

ANDREW: But it think about what it's about, Glenn. It's about a mother with her dead son. It is a world with a dead God. It's the worst movement in human history. And yet Michelangelo, a man, made it beautiful.

And my question at the end of the book, is if a man can take that misery, that suffering, that evil, and turn it into beauty, what can God do with the world that we're living in now?

When he works with the marvel of eternity. And so I work my way to that point, by going to the movies that we watch, the stories that we read.

And why we're so fascinated with murder.

You know, think about try crime. This is what this is about.

STU: Why are we?

ANDREW: Because it is the borderline, where you cannot say, there's something right about this.

It's the place where I suddenly realize that the moral order has its great points, but it also has a very stark --

GLENN: So explain to me. Explain to me why shows like, let's say.

Yellowstone.

Are so satisfying, because you're kind of like -- kind of like seeing that guy taking to the train station.

You know what I mean?

You know that it's wrong. But you're kind of in there. You're kind of like -- you know.

And you feel. At least I do. I mean, I'm sure a lot of people watch. Yeah. That's fine.

I watch it. I don't like the fact that I kind of -- I'm rooting for them.

ANDREW: I think the best art does that to you. I really enjoy this. That actually tells me something about myself, that I don't want to think about.

GLENN: Yeah.

ANDREW: See, a lot of people think art is like a sugar pill, that they used to give you a little lesson in life. A little parable of sorts. I don't think that's what it is at all.

I think it's an experience that you really can't have in your life, that broadens the way you look at life. Broadens your view of humanity. So when you get Christian stories like God Is Not Dead. I don't want to pick on anybody.

GLENN: But you'll pick on them.

ANDREW: I will pick on them. The guy is hit by a car. He says, well, at least he was saved.

I think, really? We can't just say -- you can't call his wife say, and say, this is a sad moment. Let me grieve when people die? We can't say we're horrified by death and afraid?

So I want Christian art that deals with life in a real way.

And shows that people who are afraid. And people who have evil thoughts, and people who want to justify murder. And they -- there are moments when we all sort of think -- but if you go off into a room by yourself and ask, how can I make the perfect world?

Within two minutes, so help me.

You will be committing mass murder in your mind.

Let me see. Well, first, I have to go to rid of these people because these people can't be reformed. You'll wipe them out, right?

So that's who we all are.

When he start to see that. I believe that's actually a layer on top of who we really.

I believe who we really are is who Christ wants us to be. That's the question.

How do you get through that layer?

That's what artists do for us. They show us our true selves.

And lead our conscience to the place we're supposed to go.

GLENN: All right. Our natural soul is who Christ wants us to be.

ANDREW: Right.

GLENN: And we're encapsulated in this flesh. And the natural man is an enemy to that. And it's the battle back and forth.

ANDREW: And that's what art is. That battle. That's where drama comes from. That's where tragedy comes from.

You know, one of the stories I mentioned in the Kingdom of Cain is Macbeth, because it's such a great story about murder.

And it ends with the most beautiful speech about nihilism, about things, nothing makes sense. Nothing is worth anything. Right? Life is a tale told by an idiot. But because you're watching a play, you understand, Shakespeare is not saying that. A guy has detached himself from the moral order is saying that. He's lost the meaning of life, because he's detached himself from the meaning of life.

And so studying murder and writing art about murder. Takes you to the most serious questions about who we are. And who we really are. And what we really want. And how we -- you know, that inner battle that goes on. Which is to me, the source of drama.