And we're back with another edition of the Federalist Radio Hour. I'm Sam mangel
then, a staff editor at The Federalist. As always, be sure to
email any comments or questions for the show to radio at the Federalist dot com,
follow us on Twitter at fdr LST, and make sure to subscribe wherever
you download your podcasts. Today's guest is Vince Dao. You might recognize him
as the young man who went viral for advocating basic truths about human nature to
race obsessed leftist in a recent panel hosted by Vice Media in which a group
of young adults discussed and debated what it meant to be an Asian American in
the United States. Vince is also the host of The Vince Dao Show on
YouTube, where you can catch him Monday through Friday eight pm Eastern. Today
we'll be discusing some recent headlines as well as America's ongoing obsession with race over
individual character. I hope you enjoy the show. All right, Vince,
thanks for joining. How are you doing today? I'm good, I'm good,
great to be here, Thanks for having me, no problem. So
for the audience, would you mind you used an introduction? Where would they
know you from. What's your backstory where you're from. Yeah, so I'm
Vince Taw. I'm a gen Z conservative commentator. I actually grew up in
Los Angeles and sort of that was my arc of starting to do politics is
I was a high schooler when March for Our Lives happened, and you know,
I kind of started to realize how stupid the arguments of these gun control
kids were and how ridiculous of a character David Hog was. And there's another
one, Emma Gonzalez. No one really remembers her, or the one with
the bald head, but you know, yeah, she did go a little
crazy, and so that's kind of how I started. I've been doing just
videos and content for a lot of years, and you know, people,
some people I know me as a guy who went on that Vice panel with
Asia about Asian Americans and said very normal things that said, you know,
the liberals on the panel insane, But yeah, that's what I do.
You know, like gen Z conservative commentary basically very cool. So I want
to touch on the Vice panel again in a second, but you know,
before we get into that in depth, you mentioned some conventional wisdom and how
you were living and grew up in California. What exactly were lack of a
better term, you know, your red pilling moments in California. Was it
things that march for life that really brought you over to conservative politics or were
you always kind of of that inclination to begin with? So I was not
always a conservative. I was always anti woke, anti PC, you know
what I mean. So back in twenty sixteen, I watched all the anti
SAW stuff and I thought they were all stupid. But I used to think
that there was. I used to sort of being like the Bill Mahertulsi gatherer
position and even mind this was I was in like middle school kid, you
not, but I used to be of that position where we could fix the
left. We could change the left by you know, not making it stupid
and ridiculous and making it sort of an actual, like populous movement because I
used to drink the kool aid, hey, actually being you know, the
left wing is about the working people and all this stuff. But then I
was like, Okay, then if we can say say we're about equality,
but we hate men and white people and straight people, then what is this
movement? You know what I mean? And so back a long time ago.
I mean, I don't believe really anything left wing anymore, I would
say, but a long time ago, when I was very young, that's
sort of where I stood on these issues, and I guess over time.
I mean, I remember in the twenty sixteen election, I did not get
on board with Hillary Clinton because I saw like, I thought she had basically
screwed over Bernie Sanders. I thought she was very corrupt, and I saw
Trump as being, well, I don't agree with him on everything, but
he leaves he's somewhat anti establishment, he's speaking truth to the power. He's
not going to start World War three. You know. I was kind of
my logic on the Trump part. But I found myself getting along a lot
better with the Trump supporters than Hillary people, and I realized, well,
Trump supporters, you know a lot of them are just normal, cool people
and the people I get along with and joke around with and have fun with,
whereas you know, the Hillary supporters are all just deeply miserable and insane
people. So that was sort of my first moment of seeing that, and
I was like, I can't out stand this side. Why am I a
part of this? But then I guess twenty seventeen, I kind of took
a step back from politics and didn't care for a while, and then yeah,
March for Our Lives happened. I was in high school at the time,
and so I remember the walk out all that stuff. I never really
thought about the issue of guns, but then I kind of thought about it
logically, and I was like, well, I want my police officer at
school, right, I want my good guy with a gun all that stuff.
So you know that that sort of started. I started watching some Tucker
Carlson monologues and really, you know La, where I grew up, under
the Trump presidency, the Trump years, I mean, it totally went off
a clip. I mean, there's always been problems, it's always been expensive,
but you also see just the homelessness crop up. I mean I grew
up in the San Fernando Valley, not a super nice part of it,
but you guess a middle class part of it, right, So you never
saw I saw homeless people around in LA. I never saw them in my
own area grown up, you know what I mean, This just wasn't a
thing. And then they start popping up around you, and then that's another
aspect. So yeah, I mean I guess by the end of ninth grade,
I became conservative and then yeah, here we are now pretty cool.
So it's a pretty fast trajectory, it seems like. And it was yeah,
yeah, it was you mentioned, and it kind of seems like a
lot of gen Z And I was born in nineteen ninety six, so I'm
kind of caught in between the gen Z millennial pipeline unfortunately, so I'm not
really sure where I fall into that paradigm. But I think a lot of
people are really experiencing that where it's sudden gradually than all that once, just
because of how fast the decline was, And you mentioned Toci Gabbert and Bill
Maher. It's it's fascinating how you know a lot of these IDW types to
intellectual Dark Web types, they're really just you know, classical liberals. You
know, take Barry Weiss for instance, she is, you know, not
a conservative, but the fact that she's not anti free speech, the fact
that you know, she worked for the New York Times and she was pushed
out solely for being a journalist who was doing actual reporting, being an actual
journalist. These people who are classical liberals at best. You know, I'm
not sure, if that's the proper ideology to put them their classification to put
them into. But they're not radical leftists, but they're also not conservative or
you know, center right by any means. Yet conservatives tend to flock to
them as kind of the new standard bearers for you know, they don't hate
us, so they're on our side. And I think that's a really blaring
mistake that a lot of people on the right tend to make. Yeah,
I agree. I think it's it's a complicated sort of arms instance relationships we
have to have. I think it's a good thing that someone like a Joe
Rogan, Tulsie Gaberd, Bill mar all these people are at least occasionally not
being ridiculous. But yeah, I definitely agree that, you know, these
people are basically the liberals of ten years ago, fifteen years ago, more
or less. And yes, that's much better than the liberals of today.
I any day rather have that than you know, the current left. But
we also need to recognize that it is the left of ten to fifteen years
ago that led us to the left of today. Right, and so what
a lot of these people and I don't think I don't know if I'm really
like, oh, it's all one controlled opposition thing or whatever. But I
will say that the flaw that someone like you know, Bill Maher makes is
that he's someone who all along came along like, well, I thought we
were really about free speech. I thought we were really about equality. I
thought we were really about all the things that the left used to claim it
was about. And I think the fundmental flaw of misunderstanding here is that the
left was never about those things. Right. Basically, when the left did
not have were in this country, right when the country was actually ran by
normal people, they use slogans like free speech, equality, all of these
concepts to get themselves into power, or at least to stop get themselves to
stop being persecuted or whatever it is, and to get some influence, get
a seat at the table in the institutions which are rapidly seeing now, is
that you know, none of that was ever about free speech, right.
You see Berkeley now it's the most anti free speech campus in the country because
it was never about free speech. It was always about simply just upending the
traditional norms, the traditional power structures of old, and replacing them with their
own. The leftist ones right and you see that those are far worse,
and now they're using them to clamp down on all of us. And so
I think that's what needs to be considered, is that yes, we can
say, hey, well why don't we just go back to the left of
ten to fifteen years ago, where we claimed we were for free speech.
We've come for equality and all this stuff, equality of opportunity, whatever they
slogans they were throwing out. And you'll find though that the issue is the
left has never believed these things, and um, you know, now you're
just seeing the consequences of them no longer needing those slogans because they don't have
to sell their ideas to popular masses or try to get themselves to stop being
targeted. They are the ones who can do the targeting, and so they
don't need to keep up the facade of free speech or whatever other concept for
sure. And you know, to that point, the Berkeley free speech movement
never was very explicitly you know, I got whitewashed very quickly about you know,
it's it's kind of like a free love type movement. It never was
that. It was always radical academics and you know, hippies collumpting it.
It was always just communist and yeah, it was always common USA and uh.
In his heritage address at Tucker Heritage is fiftieth anniversary Galla Tucker Carlson noted
that you know, the Democratic Party, you know, back in the day,
like thirty years ago or never, and the Republicans were always of the
mentality they were working towards a common goal. But that was you know,
the old guard. That was normal people in the Democratic Party, not the
you know, academics and who are you driving ideology to get us where we
are today? It was the normal people are It's like that meme where the
left pushes normal people out into the right and that now then they're screaming,
why are you with the fascists? There are normal people I think are perpetually
being displaced by ideologues, and the right doesn't have nearly as many you know,
I mean very explicitly, we don't have the presence in academia that the
left does. So it's it's interesting to see, how, you know,
the populist movement for lack of better term, is very much a presence on
the right because the left has disenfranchised these people explicitly time and time again.
Sure they're trying to make space for these people, I suppose through their economic
policies, but they very explicitly hate normal people, and they're not trying to
hide it. They just want to alienate people that they don't like esthetically or
for whatever purpose. It's an interesting paradigm shift, and I would see even
on the economic front. I mean, when's really the last time you heard
Democrats extensively talk about the one percent or fighting the rich or whatever it is.
I know Biden said it a little bit in the State of the Union,
but really it's not even rhetoric I hear from the left anymore. You
know, the twenty sixteen Bernie Sanders, the one percent. I really do
not hear that from Democrats anymore. All of it now is social justice to
all that you know stuff. So I think they've totally abandoned that. And
I think part of the reason why they have abandoned this economic rhetoric is they're
starting to realize, actually, all of our allies are the one percent,
right Silicon Valley, those are those are our people. Most of the billionaires
in our country actually support our causes, And so occasionally when it comes to
Elon Musk, they'll Elizabeth Warren will tweet out something like, see, he's
the reason why we should have our policies. But you know, in reality,
yeah, they are the side of the elite. The right has become
the populous side sort of because we just don't have a lot of institutional power.
And I think simultaneously, yes, it is a good thing for us
to say we're on the side of the people, but I would also say
we need to figure out how to gain institutional power and gain it quickly.
You know what a manager. The Watchdoltor on Wall Street podcast with Chris Markowski
every day Chris helps unpack the connection between politics and the economy and how it
affects your wallet. Will Republicans miss another layup? New polls show forty percent
of Republicans don't want Trump to run, but he's still leading in the polls.
Has the new Republican strategy become leading to the left on certain issues?
How should Republicans approach this primary strategy with an easy path to the White House.
Whether it's happening in DC or down on Wall Street, it's affecting you
financially. Be informed. Check out the Watchdotter on Wall Street podcast with Chris
Markowski on Apples, Spotify or wherever you get your podcast. And I suppose,
now that I think about it, the the lift populist aspects are more
through the you know, the coalition of the dispossessed that Obama cobble together in
twenty twelve, the intersectional coalition. Yeah, yeah, very very much a
Chavez esque coalition. It's not, like I said, it wasn't economic populism
and it's it's just it's very much just grievance politics, and that's where the
populism lies. Um. But yeah, I'm moving forward. I'd love to
get into that Vice panel that you're on. I'm sure sure anyone listening to
this has seen it. If they haven't, rule put it in the show
notes. But would you like to give us a rundown about how you got
involved with that, how they how you made contact with the bankrupt Vice media
and what that was like. Yeah, so their producers reached out to me
and it was really funny. Originally we were going to do a panel about
I think it was masculinity or something that they just reached out and they're just
booking trying to find people to do whatever. I'm on conservative Instagram and YouTube,
so they probably just found it from there. I don't know, but
very last minute they're like, oh, we're gonna switch you to the Asian
panel because you're Asian. That's not what they said, but that's basically what
happened, saying it. Yeah, yeah, And so you know, I
flew out to New York, we did this panel and to summarize for the
people who have not seen it, so I guess imagine this. So I'm
the only person on the panel who shows up in a suit. Everyone else
looks like, you know, just gen z pop street clothes or whatever.
So there's are you know, there's already little dynamic there. They basically sit
me in the middle of all the crazy liberals on the panel. Technically is
supposed to be three conservatives, three centrists, three liberals the centrist or really
just liberals though, so it's really six on three and then right, and
then they were just going after me the entire time, and so we kind
of sit down in this panel and it really it all starts when they think,
I think they asked me, what's your thoughts on the term Asian American?
And I said I suppose it, you know, it's I guess it's
a thing. But I don't really like the term because I prefer to just
say American. I don't like the hyfinatid Americanism idea. You know, I'm
like with Teddy Roosevelt, right, there's no room for hyphenated Americanism. And
so I said that, and then immediately all these like these very dramatic,
crazy TikTok leftist that they all brought to the panel, just they have all
the craziest facial expect they're like shocked. You know. This one kid,
he just kept like bobbing back and forth like he was just having a It
was. It was crazy. And so that's basically sums up the entire panel.
And then I throughout it, I just say incredibly normal things. They
asked about assimilation. I said, well, I think some degree of assimilation
isn't necessary because societies can't hold together if people don't have anything in common,
you know, very basic stuff I think. And then you know, they're
again going absolutely insane. And there's at one point where I said, like,
just don't commit crime, you know, I said, basically, well,
if you want to succeed in life, then you know, there's very
basic things you have to do, just you know, work hard, don't
commit crime, don't college trouble, don't like drop out of high school,
all these all the very normal stuff, and they were going absolutely crazy.
There's just one iconic shot where I just said don't have kids out of wedlock
and the liberal guy is like, what, you know, it's funny,
And then they said, well that's cultural erasure. Right, asked g minorities
not to commit crime as cultural erasier. So that sums up the panel.
It's just, you know, forty minutes of that of me saying very normal
things, barely conservative things I would argue, and and then them is just
having an absolute panic attack meltdown. Do you think you changed anyone else's mind
on the panel? Do you? I mean, I think you moved the
needle a lot in normal America. Like, I think that was a pretty
awakening moment for a lot of just normal people across the political spectrum. But
do you think anyone on the panel actually had their mind changed or she showed
them that they're just out of touch with reality. No, I don't think
so at all. I think you saw the reaction of those people they're just
this is the whole time. Yeah, right, I think that I don't
even think their their goal was to come in it with an open mind.
I'd have to imagine. I think that basically everyone is in those panels to
like promote themselves and you know, go on, go off moment. And
you know, it doesn't sound like I changed anyone's minds, but right,
it seems like a lot of them were just playing for the camera. Like
you mentioned the one guy kept bobbing back and forth. The whole thing was
just his facial features or facial It wasn't like any actual subspec you know.
I'll tell you the backstory of that guy. So that guy is essentially the
Granta Thunberg David Hogg before that stuff was around, like back in the Obama
presidency. So long story. He's he's the son of the CEO of City
Bank, so Bill Bill billionaire son. Yeah so um ironic. But so
he's been going to working class right through the connections of his father. He's
been in like democratic politics since Obama was president. Like there's pictures of him
at the White House back in twenty fifteen and stuff, and you know he's
done all these different Ted talks where he just used these vague platitudes about diversity
or whatever he talks about. I don't know, right, we're in salad,
and you know it's out with all these people, right, David Hogg,
what has he ever actually said anything specific about guns? Nothing? He
ever? He just tweets platitudes all the time. Greta Thundberg, same exact
thing. I love how David Hog will get into Harvard lall with like a
one fifty l s at. That's my favorite thing about him. Is that
true? That's that he got into the Harvard I have no idea if he
is. He did get into Harvard undergrad. Yeah, on a twelve fifty,
So yeah, that is true. But back to what I was trying
to get into here. So you'll notice every kid, activist kid on the
left, this is kind of how they get their fame is by being just
incredibly dramatic. I don't know what it is about liberals Democrats, but they
just eat that stuff up. Some kid out there screaming, being incredibly dramatic,
being incredibly expressive. And you see that now with the TikTok Democrat kids,
and you see that even with Justin Pearson and Justin Jones, right,
the Tennessee Democrats, the gen Z Tennessee Democrat legislators, and so this is
a kid along those lines. He was doing it before any of this stuff.
He figured out this all. If you're just very expressive and spit vague
platitudes, it works with people. But the problem is, and I think
what happened there is the same thing that would happen if you put any of
these other gen Z crazy left wing activist kids on a panel like that,
which is that the moment they're actually confronted with someone who doesn't just buy up
their emotional nonsense, and you know, the moment they actually have to challenge
their ideas with someone who's not just gonna bomb around back and forth in response,
you know, immediately you see how through the contrast, you see how
ridiculous they are, and you know it's a bad look for them, and
they totally lose the exchange. And I think that's kind of what happens.
No, I think it's very accurate, you know it just even with Greta,
I know it's all AstroTurf. It's all they're all put on by megadners,
by corporate sponsors, it's all. It's all very cynical, frankly,
very hyper capitalistic exercise, which is beautifully ironic considering the Marxist drivel they pedal.
But you know, moving forward, let's get into some of the really
interesting headlines of the week. Jordan Neely, the Mechael Jackson impersonator or performer
whom you know, unfortunately lost his life. I'm not really sure what the
surrounding situation is, whether he was, you know, on drugs or just
mentally unwell. I'm not sure. You know, he had a long criminal
rap sheet, it seems like he should forty one ars. Yeah, it's
it's and that's a very common occurrence. Unfortunately, these people who ought to
either be in jail for a long time or ought to be in you know,
mentalness, mental institutions. They shouldn't be on the street. They're not.
It's not safe for them or the people they're accosting. What are your
thoughts, Yeah, I mean absolutely that that's That's the one thing I will
say is that Jordan Nearly would still be alive today if you were never on
the street, which he should never have been on the street. You know,
um, forty one ars. He was wanted at the time for felony
assault. There are alleged rumors, there are alleged rumors he was trying to
push people into the subways just days before. You know, there's no reason
the guy should have been in the society to begin with. But you know,
here you have this situation where he was going around on the subway violently
threatening people, and you know, one guy just took matters into his own
hands. And I don't think he intentionally wanted to kill him, or I
don't know if it's even confirmed yet that that's actually what killed him, because
it could have been a George Floyd thing where it's a combination of that and
the drugs, you know what I mean. But yeah, I mean,
and then of course you have to imagine, I'm sure, I know what's
going to happen to this marine. Is that for stepping in for you know,
trying to protect others, trying to do something heroic? You know,
New York is gonna probably throw him in jail for the rest of his life.
And I don't know, Alvin Bragg and all that stuff. I'm not
very optimistic about the case, but you know, principally speaking, I think
it really is a case of fff around and find out. Right, you
go around on a subway threatening people. I mean a lot of New Yorkers
are making the excuse, Oh, that's normal, that's what people do on
the New York subway. Yeah, you know what else happens a lot on
the New York subway is violence? Okay, It's like, yeah, it's
true. A lot of crazy, tweaked out homeless people do that in the
subway. And then we'll guess what else happens? They attack people and stuff.
And so I think, and you see the forty one arrest felony assault
active warrant. I mean, I think the marine in question was right to
be to take that threat seriously at face value, and you know, I
think he did the right thing. But you know, obviously the law does
not reflect that. And that's kind of the problem with the vigilanteism in the
twenty first century in America, right. But yeah, I mean, I
guess that sums up my thoughts on it. Now. I'm prone to agree.
Unfortunately, I'm not really optimistic about these situations either. Yeah, it's
very you know, at this point, who can blame people for not really
wanting to intervene and to protect others. If you disincentivize good people from wanting
to protect their countrymen, right, no one is going to step in.
It's the same thing with you know, we gutted mental institutions, major cities
across the country have gutted the police. Crime is skyrocketing. What do you
expect it is going to happen? These are all natural results of It's very
logical that this stuff is happening. There's no funding for you know, mental
health resources, but we keep talking about the need for it. Why are
we surprised if things keep happening? It's it's it's all you know, how
do we not see this? It was the tree is right there? How
do we miss it? Um? Yeah, So I'd like to hear your
thoughts on as well, how do we bridge the generational divide in politics?
Um? You know there's always talk about how boomers, you know, ruin
the world, ruined the country, but you know it's it's up to younger
generations to fix it as well. So how do you think we can bridge
the divide on how to talk about political issues? Cultural issues? Um?
How to you know, solve the intersectional brain rot that is destroying our cultural
conversations and things of that nature. Yeah, So, I mean, I
guess I'll approach it from the gen Z side and then the Boomer side.
I think on the gen Z side, at least you're on the right wing,
which I suppose I could probably speak to you more. Um, you
know, I I don't really I don't really subscribe to this whole narrative that
the boomers destroyed the world, as in your average Fox News viewing Republican boomer
is responsible for the reason why you can't get a girlfriend, you know,
and like, for the for the record, I don't think any honest person
really believes that. I think there's just a sense of, oh, it's
a lot on the gen Z side. No, yeah, yeah, I
do think there's something to be said about the boomer political class, right,
the kind of people that have run our party and are of that age,
you know, like Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi who have got who are mass
and massive wealth justter being in politics and doing exactly yeah, exactly, And
so there's a lot to be said there. But I also find very often
that the sort of average Republican boomer out there or a gen xer you know,
you really sit them down and you speak about the issues you care about
in a way that at least a conservative, in a way that is presentable,
in a way that they can understand. I usually find they one hundred
percent agree. You know, they feel the exact same way. They're disaffected
in the same exact way, and so, you know, I think a
lot of the generational divide just has to be bridged through having conversations in ways
that I guess people can understand. I guess on the boomer side, you
know, there's a lot of talk that, oh, our generation is so
so far left wing and it's all hopeless and stuff. And I guess what
I would say on that front is that there's a lot of disaffected people in
our generation. And a lot of them might not be political yet, some
of them just like red pill content, manosphere content, whatever it is.
But I think that there is a I don't think it's the majority, but
I think there's a sizeable minority in our generation that is not really a long
does not really subscribe to all the quote unquote wokeness, and I think they
need to be reached, they need to be targeted, and you see the
the just cultural impact that someone like a Jordan Peterson or Andrew Taate or all
these just kind of figures that come along and speak to disaffected young men is
very powerful. These are these end up becoming some of the most influential people
on Earth. Right, So clearly there's something about our generation that's not just
all the hippies, and yeah, there's a lot of those, but there's
also this sort of specifically I would hone in disaffected young men who are not
really on board with all this stuff. But the problem is, and the
reason you don't see them, the reason they're not visible is because they are
just that they're disaffected, right, your average young man, most of them
are invisible in society, right. And so I know about them because I
mean this young, but a lot of people, a lot of boomers,
I guess, just don't know about them, don't understand that this is a
thing. And I think that's my issue with the way the GOP tries to
outreach to gen z if at all, which normally they don't even make an
attempt, which I think is a serious mistake because even if it makes a
small dent, at least you're planning the seeds for what later down the line,
maybe might be a bigger movement. You know, you got to start
somewhere. But then I'd say that's the other sort of mistake to the approaches.
I don't think they'd realize who they're speaking to or what their natural audience
might be. I've heard proposals like, well, the GOP needs to come
up with a solution on climate change, or they need to moderate on this
issue or that issue, And I don't think that's really what it's about.
I think it's just that they're misunderstanding what gen Z is. There's two sizeable
camps in gen Z. There's the liberal side, which I guess if you
want to try to pick off some moderate liberals, I mean, good luck.
You could try, but I don't know. I don't want to become
totally woke on every social issue just to try to win that vote. Or
you could appeal to the disaffected young man who is not He may not be
conservative, but he's not left wing either. He just generally feels that the
world has broken, society's broken, society doesn't care about him, you know.
And I think conservatism, which in many ways gives a moral purpose to
things and to people, could speak a lot to that, and like I
said, I think you look at these sort of like not hyper political,
but semi right wing figures that have just come up and are now very popular
among young men in our generation. I think that's real. So I don't
know that answer the question. I suppose no, it does. And it
seems like I keep hearing similar responses to that, and it seems like at
the end of the day, it comes down more to culture and preserving a
healthy culture for people to you know, have families and actually be human beings,
create an environment that's conducive to human flourishing as opposed to obsessing about corporate
tax rates. And until we get out of this sort of you know,
worldview that's held hostage by the Chamber of commerce, I don't think that's really
going to be possible, but I think we're kind of at a point where
people are starting to become privy to that, especially with declining fertility, declining
birth rates, and the culture just being in such an inhospitable place for anything.
I think, I think what you're proposing is right around the corner at
least. I hope I am optimistic in that sense where things become so toxic
and anti human. Frankly, that something has to give and people have to
throw their hands up and realize, you know, we have to see what's
going on. Well, the issue is that, I mean, what are
they basically going to prescribe? Oh, well, you know, the birthrates
are struggling, let's just let bring it in from other parts of the world
that have high birthrates. People are depressed and feel meaningless in life, will
take these anti depressants and you know, numb yourself with whatever it is,
video games, social media, you know, just whatever. Right, So
I think that's the issue, though, is I don't know if that's a
guarantee, because especially when people become addicted to things, and you know,
once you're kind of addicted to being lazy, it's hard to get out of
that. You know. It's hard to get up out of bed when you're
lazy, it's hard to get in the gym when you don't work out,
you know, And so I don't know, I don't know, it's it's
gonna be hard. I definitely think that if done correctly, led by the
right people, yeah, I can wake people up. A movement like that
can speak to people. But I would also say that I don't. I
don't think we should see that as a given. I think someone has to
step up and do it, you know, for sure said it's not a
given at all, and it's going to take a lot of heavy lifting.
I just think that that paradigm, I think is about the flip. You
know, once things, situations become dire enough, people, I think start
to Americans are very bad at being proactive. We're really good at being reactive
and finding solutions once we need to find a solution. And I think,
you know, specifically with things like fertility and um We'll probably not fertility because
that's an issue all over the world, but I think with certain things we'll
be able to find solutions much more effectively than we otherwise would be. In
two um. But in regards to gen Z and communication methods, TikTok,
there's you know, the restrict Act. It seems like a lot of it
was a partisan proposal, but it seems like the ground swell and grassroots are
very much opposed to it, which is you know, understandable because there's a
lot of talk about, you know, being allegedly a Patriot Act two point
zero. I'm not too keen on that phrasing. But there's also talk about,
you know, TikTok is less hostile to conservatives than silicon values, and
either way, your data is getting stolen. It's all these institutions are kind
of you know, anti American interests when the American interests are properly oriented.
What are your thoughts on that is TikTok you know, and that positive?
We tolerate it? Or is it really just cultural rot and a. I
mean, it is a national security threat, but what do we do about
about that in the medium term? So coup a couple of things. So,
first of all, I do not like the bill currently to band TikTok.
What it basically does is it gives the Secretary of Commerce for commerce,
Yeah, Secretary of Commerce the authority to more or less just ban anything,
you know what I mean. It gets elected officials and bureaucrats entirely too much
power. It is very, very scary, right, So my take on
TikTok itself. I mean, as for the data mining thing, are you
know, spyware or whatever I do? I would generally say yes, it's
kind of a matter of well, Silicon Valley does the same thing, right,
Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, they all do the exact same thing.
And I understand, though from a national perspective why our government might say,
well, we don't want that data in the hands of the Chinese. I
mean, I get it, But for me, it's not really like the
biggest issue either way. But what I will say about TikTok is that in
my experience, it has not been friendlier to conservatives than liberals. It's been
one hundred percent the opposite. It's actually the worst platform to be a conservative
on. The hate speech guidelines on there are the strictest, and a lot
of stuff gets banned subjectively, like they don't even really have clear guidelines on
there, just get banned. Back in twenty twenty Trump TikToker, but twenty
twenty one, actually they ban basically every conservative, major conservative TikToker from the
platform and have not brought them back. And now I understand now it's a
little bit better, I think partially because they're trying to stop this bill,
so it's like, Okay, let's try to ease up a little bit.
But no, that's not been my experience at all. And then I would
say that in terms of there's something about the algorithm of TikTok that in some
ways is so masterfully designed and well designed, but also is so incredibly addictive
that I would actually say it's worse than a lot of other social platforms for
sure, And the way in which people spend their day on TikTok so disproportionately
and they aglued to it so much more. I definitely don't like it as
an app. Now, I just started a new TikTok account and I'm trying
to use that as a means to reach people, and I think that it
is worthwhile. If you know, if it's a place that most kids are
on, then yeah, we might as well, you know, use it
and occupy it. But I would overall, I mean, I do genuinely
buy the idea that it's worse than a lot of other social platforms and stuff
like that. But I mean, also, what are we going to do.
We got to use it while we have it to try to reach people,
because to tiktok'stredit is a place where you can go viral very quickly,
right if you're doing it right. So you know, there's some things to
consider, for sure, And it seems, you know, I'm kind of
the mentality granted, this is just pure speculation. The restrict Acts. At
least what has been said on record is that it is in an adaptation of
Trump's previous executive order to get Bite Dance to divest from TikTok, so an
American company or American investors can turn into an American company. And you know,
if that's if we're following that logic, that's a strategy with the restrict
Act. So my thought process is that if they want to turn TikTok into
just another silicon valley American asset, it's kind of just going to follow the
same approach as Meta or Twitter or any other looking valley monolith that is just
going to weaponize itself against the American people. And like you said, it's
great for virality and reaching young people if we have in a ability to use
that to get our message out there before it clams down on us. I
see that as in that positive. I think the issue is kind of,
you know, who are we alienating while doing that of our already existing base,
And how do we maintain our message, messages credibility while doing so?
That way, we don't you know, risk our you know, pandering to
rather getting coopted by woke algorithms to make sure we don't compromise our messages integrity
in order to reach more people. So it's kind of like a it's a
monkey's pall. Quite frankly, I don't really I don't think there is a
perfect answer. I think it's just a lot of you know, strategic feeling
it out and seeing how we have to proceed as we go. Well,
I think that, I mean, that's sort of the case on every social
platform and even on the TV airwave right to some agree with the TV.
You know, there's FCC guidelines that are pretty pretty generationally solid. I think
the issue with you know, big tech is the algorithms are just so shadowy
and you know, sure, you know Musk's Twitter um made that public,
but even then, Twitter under Elon Musk is just as broken if it or
if if not more broken, because at the end of the day, these
CEOs don't really run them. It's the managerial class and the bureaucrats within that
are embedded within these organizations that run them. Yeah, I mean I think
that it may come off some people, and I know it happens all the
time. Hey, you know, why aren't you talking about the election on
YouTube. Hey you screw you, you know, But it's just I think
the truth of the matter is we have to understand, we have to be
practical about things. We have to understand. Okay, there's an audience on
here. I mean, yes, it'd be yeah, go move to my
altech site. Sure, do that. But you know he's not going to
have the same audience on there. You're not gonna have the same reach there.
These are the platforms where the discussions are happening. These are the platforms
where culture is being impacted. And I think it would be silly for conservatives
to retreat from them instead of trying to use them practically. And I understand
it's not perfect. I understand that you might try to think you're following everything
correctly and still get banned. I mean, I'm not, you know,
trying to defend these platforms. I'm just saying that I think if we're still
allowed on them, if the individual is still allowed on them, I think
it's silly not to try to figure out how to use it and try to
spread a message on there. And TikTok to me is no different. And
if some people don't like the fact that, hey, why are you conservatives
on TikTok? I mean then I guess, okay, then don't I mean
not to be the libertarian about this, But then you don't have to use
TikTok. We're not demanding, We're just saying there's people on there, we're
trying to reach them, and you know, holding yourself off into this niche
of whatever. It's just I don't think it's smart strategy. You know,
you have to try to reach people on everywhere you can reach them, right,
And I think it's something to be said about, you know, like
I said, using all tech platforms, but certain and by the way,
even on that front, I would stay on the flip side. You know,
I don't think it's a good thing that Tucker car I don't think it's
good thing that Fox News lost Tucker Carls or Tucker Carlson lost Fox News everywhere
you want to see it, because you know that that I would also acknowledge.
As a younger person, I don't watch any cable news, but cable
news is an airway for a lot of people. Right there's a lot of
people that still watch it. Made the older people. I think it's a
declining medium, but still there's a lot of people that watch it in the
country. And now that you know, you could say Fox News is struggling
understandably and logically as a network. I don't think that's entirely good for our
society either, because cable news is another medium. I don't like the medium.
I don't use the medium, but I'm still mature enough to recognize,
hey, well, then other people are on this medium, they watch this
medium, they take it seriously. So conservatives have to try to be on
there, you know. And so I would say the same thing in the
other direct, not for sure, and it's I'm of the same mentality.
You know. We have to we have to wage the war on all fronts.
Putting ourselves in these little ideological echo chambers. It might be nice for
the little serotonin and boots when you get a bunch of retweets or read truths
or whatever the boost name is in whatever platform, but if you're not reaching
as many people as possible, what is the point. You're just gonna You're
just gonna lose. And sure, sure the algorithms are going to weaponize themselves
against us, but you know that's a risk we kind of have to take.
Until we can assure you know, actual freedom of speech on all platforms.
Yeah, yeah, for sure, I agree. Well, it's been
it's been great having you on um where can people find you? So?
You can find me on YouTube, which is my I guess my most active
platform. I'm there at I'm just look at my name, Vince daw I'm
on Twitter at Vince daw TV and Instagram at the Vince dow So and I'm
on Rumble too. You can find me on there. Hey, folks,
thanks for listening. As always, be lovers of freedom and anxious for the
fray. You got me right, but you won't be right right