WEBVTT 1 00:00:00.240 --> 00:00:02.839 Come straight from the fountain of youth. So I'm ready, 2 00:00:04.200 --> 00:00:05.599 I listenally have that's where it was. 3 00:00:05.719 --> 00:00:09.640 It shows, Charles, you can tell we put the Voting 4 00:00:10.000 --> 00:00:13.720 Rights Act together because there was an issue because they 5 00:00:13.720 --> 00:00:20.879 were cheaping people from voting. They were literally shooting people. 6 00:00:21.480 --> 00:00:24.920 That problem is gone. It's not gone because you're still 7 00:00:24.960 --> 00:00:25.399 doing it. 8 00:00:25.679 --> 00:00:28.879 The Supreme Court did the right thing in deciding that 9 00:00:28.920 --> 00:00:31.800 we should end rachel terry mandering. Chief Justice said, as 10 00:00:31.960 --> 00:00:34.399 we said, best weight to stop discriminating by race is 11 00:00:34.439 --> 00:00:35.759 to stop discriminating by race. 12 00:00:35.840 --> 00:00:38.880 It's the Ricochet Podcast, number seven hundred and eighty seven, 13 00:00:39.200 --> 00:00:42.359 Steve Hayward sitting in the host chair today with Charles C. W. 14 00:00:42.479 --> 00:00:46.280 Cook and our special guest Spencer claybn. So let's have 15 00:00:46.320 --> 00:00:47.399 ourselves a podcast. 16 00:00:47.799 --> 00:00:50.679 So that's good. That's the kind of ruling. 17 00:00:50.719 --> 00:00:55.159 I like, when did that happen both this morning? 18 00:00:55.200 --> 00:00:55.520 Really? 19 00:00:55.640 --> 00:00:56.119 Is that right? 20 00:00:56.240 --> 00:00:57.399 You tell me about the ruling. 21 00:00:57.920 --> 00:01:01.439 Welcome everybody to the Ricochet Podcast. Steve Hayward hosting today 22 00:01:01.520 --> 00:01:05.439 for the vacationing I guess James Lilas with Charles C. W. 23 00:01:05.719 --> 00:01:12.079 Cook and Charles So, you know, another week, another assassination attempt. Hohum, Right, 24 00:01:12.719 --> 00:01:16.319 another piece plan from Iran that isn't. But I guess 25 00:01:16.359 --> 00:01:18.239 really the biggest news of the week for me, and 26 00:01:18.319 --> 00:01:20.799 I know for you is this Supreme Court decision on 27 00:01:20.840 --> 00:01:23.400 the Voting Rights Act. And I have thoughts, but I 28 00:01:23.439 --> 00:01:25.519 suspect you have more of them, because I haven't had 29 00:01:25.519 --> 00:01:27.359 a chance to read the opinion yet. 30 00:01:28.280 --> 00:01:30.560 Well, I did read it. I read it the moment 31 00:01:30.640 --> 00:01:35.560 that it came out, and I found the majority opinion persuasive, 32 00:01:35.959 --> 00:01:39.879 and I found the two paragraph concurrence by Clarence Thomas 33 00:01:39.959 --> 00:01:44.239 joined by Neil Gorsuch even more persuasive. Thomas did the 34 00:01:44.280 --> 00:01:47.159 thing he does every time and has been doing on 35 00:01:47.159 --> 00:01:50.120 this topic for thirty years, where he said yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, 36 00:01:50.200 --> 00:01:51.319 now go further. 37 00:01:52.560 --> 00:01:52.719 Right. 38 00:01:53.319 --> 00:01:58.079 In effect, the argument here is that the Supreme Court 39 00:01:59.040 --> 00:02:03.400 has merely assumed that Section two of the Voting Rights 40 00:02:03.400 --> 00:02:08.719 Act requires majority minority district and Alita says it doesn't. 41 00:02:09.120 --> 00:02:13.000 And he takes a swing at the Court in the 42 00:02:13.039 --> 00:02:19.800 eighties and correctly says that the holding opinion until now 43 00:02:21.000 --> 00:02:23.840 had been written at a time when the Court didn't 44 00:02:23.879 --> 00:02:26.680 pay that much attention to the text and breathed in 45 00:02:26.719 --> 00:02:30.280 all sorts of meanings that simply weren't there. That case 46 00:02:30.319 --> 00:02:35.240 was a case called Gingles from I think nineteen eighty two. Anyhow, 47 00:02:35.680 --> 00:02:40.680 the logic works a bit like this. If the Voting 48 00:02:40.800 --> 00:02:45.840 Rights Acts second section does not require majority minority districts, 49 00:02:46.120 --> 00:02:50.520 then majority minority districts drawn by definition on the basis 50 00:02:50.639 --> 00:02:56.280 of race are unconstitutional because considering race in government policy 51 00:02:56.680 --> 00:03:03.639 is illegal. And Alita proposes that there are now only 52 00:03:03.759 --> 00:03:08.719 two exceptions to that rule. One is race riots. In 53 00:03:08.759 --> 00:03:12.520 a sense, he says that government is allowed to make 54 00:03:12.639 --> 00:03:17.439 public policy on the basis of race to separate people 55 00:03:18.120 --> 00:03:20.800 if they're rioting on the basis of race, because it 56 00:03:20.800 --> 00:03:23.599 would be completely absurd to say, we can't stop this 57 00:03:23.680 --> 00:03:27.680 prison riot where the white prison population and the black 58 00:03:27.719 --> 00:03:30.800 population are trying to kill each other, because that would 59 00:03:30.840 --> 00:03:33.199 violate the fourteenth Amendment. This is a long standing rule, 60 00:03:33.240 --> 00:03:36.639 it seems. And the other exception, he says is if 61 00:03:36.680 --> 00:03:41.439 there is a government policy that is designed to prevent 62 00:03:41.520 --> 00:03:48.159 an explicit and current racial discrimination, then you can consider race. 63 00:03:49.080 --> 00:03:51.400 But he says you can't consider race here, and I 64 00:03:51.520 --> 00:03:54.080 just think I think, first off, this seems to be 65 00:03:54.199 --> 00:03:59.080 correct if you read through the opinion. The law itself 66 00:03:59.280 --> 00:04:03.599 has a provision in which it says that nothing in 67 00:04:03.719 --> 00:04:11.840 this Act should be construed to assume that the various 68 00:04:11.960 --> 00:04:15.560 racial populations of the United States are entitled to proportional 69 00:04:15.599 --> 00:04:19.759 representation along racial lines. So I think that the statutory 70 00:04:19.879 --> 00:04:22.079 argument is obvious. I also think this should just be 71 00:04:22.160 --> 00:04:27.000 celebrated given that the argument is clear. I'm amazed reading 72 00:04:27.040 --> 00:04:31.000 all these complaints that I say, if they did the opposite. 73 00:04:31.079 --> 00:04:35.240 Every time, it seems the Supreme Court strikes a blow 74 00:04:35.360 --> 00:04:39.759 for racial equality, for color blindness, for treating citizens equally 75 00:04:39.839 --> 00:04:41.600 under the law, just as it did a few years 76 00:04:41.639 --> 00:04:44.800 ago in the affirmative Action case. The media says it 77 00:04:44.879 --> 00:04:48.639 stunees the opposite and treats it as if it's reintroducing 78 00:04:48.720 --> 00:04:52.399 Jim Crow. So, as an American citizen having been satisfied 79 00:04:52.399 --> 00:04:55.000 by Aluto's opinion, I think this is a really great 80 00:04:55.079 --> 00:04:58.079 moment in American history. That once again, not that he's 81 00:04:58.120 --> 00:05:01.439 always great in the court, but we're John Roberts line 82 00:05:01.480 --> 00:05:03.879 that the way that you stopped discriminating on the basis 83 00:05:03.879 --> 00:05:06.560 of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race. 84 00:05:07.680 --> 00:05:10.040 Yes, well, of course, as I'm sure you know and 85 00:05:10.360 --> 00:05:13.120 many listeners will know, that statement of Roberts made many 86 00:05:13.199 --> 00:05:16.879 years ago. Now, yeah, represented a direct challenge to was 87 00:05:16.920 --> 00:05:20.079 it Justice Brennan or Bly I forget who back in 88 00:05:20.120 --> 00:05:22.720 the seventies had written the only way to get it 89 00:05:22.759 --> 00:05:25.480 beyond race and racism is to take account of race. 90 00:05:26.079 --> 00:05:26.240 Right. 91 00:05:26.279 --> 00:05:30.120 It was a convoluted or welly and logic to it. Now, 92 00:05:30.199 --> 00:05:34.079 let me play devil's advocate a little bit perhaps, and 93 00:05:34.160 --> 00:05:35.560 maybe you hinted to this in one of the things 94 00:05:35.639 --> 00:05:39.800 you just said, which is remedying clear cases of discriminatory intent. 95 00:05:40.279 --> 00:05:42.600 If you'd go back to the fifties and sixties. 96 00:05:42.279 --> 00:05:44.879 When the Voting Rights Act was written, one of the 97 00:05:44.920 --> 00:05:47.439 practices in the South that the authors of the Act 98 00:05:47.439 --> 00:05:49.920 had in mind was not just barious to voting for 99 00:05:50.000 --> 00:05:54.560 blacks in the South, but things like cities. I think Jackson, Mississippi, 100 00:05:54.600 --> 00:05:57.600 was one that had all at large elections for the 101 00:05:57.639 --> 00:06:01.040 city council, which meant that that although you had a 102 00:06:01.079 --> 00:06:03.959 substantial black population, it wasn't a majority, and they could 103 00:06:03.959 --> 00:06:06.680 never get a black elected the city council. So they said, no, 104 00:06:06.759 --> 00:06:09.040 you have to have districts. Now, I don't think they 105 00:06:09.079 --> 00:06:12.720 specified they had to be racially jerrymandered, but that was 106 00:06:12.839 --> 00:06:14.639 I mean, I don't know. It seems to me that 107 00:06:14.639 --> 00:06:19.439 that is, while still perhaps problematic, a sensible thing to 108 00:06:19.480 --> 00:06:21.439 have gone after at the time. But that's very different 109 00:06:21.439 --> 00:06:23.639 than say, house districts let alone. 110 00:06:23.800 --> 00:06:26.720 Right. We can't jerrymander senate districts, right, because the senate's 111 00:06:26.759 --> 00:06:27.360 the whole state. 112 00:06:28.639 --> 00:06:32.240 Yeah, And of course there are cases such as Reynolds v. Sims, 113 00:06:32.240 --> 00:06:34.920 which I think is wrong, for it's worth got rid 114 00:06:35.160 --> 00:06:41.120 of the Senates in states, right, at least in so 115 00:06:41.199 --> 00:06:44.839 far as they represented the same sort of body as 116 00:06:44.839 --> 00:06:49.279 the United States Senate, where the populations that they represented 117 00:06:49.319 --> 00:06:54.319 were unequal. I think that it is of course entirely 118 00:06:54.439 --> 00:07:00.839 true that throughout Jim Crow, the states in the South 119 00:07:00.920 --> 00:07:07.439 that wanted to disenfranchise African Americans often did so while 120 00:07:07.439 --> 00:07:11.560 pretending they weren't in gun control. This comes up time 121 00:07:11.600 --> 00:07:14.399 and time again. For example, there's a famous law in 122 00:07:14.480 --> 00:07:20.160 Tennessee passed in eighteen seventy in which the state legislature 123 00:07:20.319 --> 00:07:23.519 does not say because it knows this is prior to 124 00:07:23.560 --> 00:07:26.839 eighteen seventy six, so it's still largely occupied. It knows 125 00:07:26.879 --> 00:07:28.639 that it will pay a price if it does. It 126 00:07:28.680 --> 00:07:33.120 does not say blacks can't have guns. What it says 127 00:07:34.000 --> 00:07:36.560 is that the only guns that you're allowed to buy 128 00:07:37.399 --> 00:07:41.519 are on this list, and the list just so happened 129 00:07:42.240 --> 00:07:46.879 to only contain guns that were issued to Confederate soldiers 130 00:07:46.920 --> 00:07:52.120 in the Civil War. Now that's a great example of 131 00:07:52.160 --> 00:07:54.199 the sort of law that would need to be struck 132 00:07:54.240 --> 00:07:57.879 down because it was facially racially neutral. And so that's 133 00:07:57.920 --> 00:08:01.680 the argument that you will hear. I think that it's 134 00:08:01.720 --> 00:08:04.040 a fair one on its own terms. But I think 135 00:08:04.120 --> 00:08:06.879 that there are a couple of objections to it, and 136 00:08:07.319 --> 00:08:10.920 one of which makes it into Alito's opinion. The country's changed, 137 00:08:11.560 --> 00:08:21.720 and you now have the statistical outcome that those who 138 00:08:21.759 --> 00:08:25.759 wrote the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Sect wanted, 139 00:08:25.920 --> 00:08:29.399 which is that African Americans voted about the same rateless 140 00:08:29.399 --> 00:08:33.159 whites in many areas they vote. Now, if that were 141 00:08:33.360 --> 00:08:37.600 the basis for Alito's opinion, I think it would be insufficient. 142 00:08:38.080 --> 00:08:39.679 I don't think it would be the role of the 143 00:08:39.720 --> 00:08:43.200 Supreme Court to second guess Congress if the argument here 144 00:08:43.240 --> 00:08:48.360 were Look, the Fifteenth Amendment allows Congress to make rules 145 00:08:48.399 --> 00:08:51.320 in this area, but we think that we're now so 146 00:08:51.559 --> 00:08:55.519 enlightened that those rules are unnecessary. So Congress doesn't have 147 00:08:55.639 --> 00:08:58.360 the authority. I think that would be outrageous because the 148 00:08:58.399 --> 00:09:03.639 fifteenth Amendment explicitly give to Congress the power to pass 149 00:09:03.799 --> 00:09:08.039 legislation in this area. But that's not Elita's or the 150 00:09:08.039 --> 00:09:13.360 majority's opinion. The majority says the law doesn't say that. 151 00:09:14.679 --> 00:09:19.039 In other words, as a secondary argument, even if you 152 00:09:19.240 --> 00:09:24.039 believe that the court should ignore the text and do 153 00:09:24.120 --> 00:09:30.799 good things for the country, that justification is weak. I mean, 154 00:09:30.879 --> 00:09:33.559 you don't need to get there, though that's the thing, right, 155 00:09:33.639 --> 00:09:35.399 You don't need to get there because he's saying as 156 00:09:35.399 --> 00:09:40.120 a textual matter, it just doesn't say that the Congress 157 00:09:40.120 --> 00:09:45.000 gets to superintend Gerrymanderin. It says that you're not allowed 158 00:09:45.080 --> 00:09:47.200 to deprive people of their right to vote, and they 159 00:09:47.200 --> 00:09:52.159 are criteria for that that are not Gerrymanderin. But if 160 00:09:52.159 --> 00:09:54.519 you're going to take an expansive view of the law 161 00:09:54.559 --> 00:09:57.879 and ignore the text, that doesn't make sense either, because 162 00:09:57.919 --> 00:10:00.200 we now don't have the same problem that we had 163 00:10:00.240 --> 00:10:03.080 in nineteen sixty five. So I agree with you that 164 00:10:03.200 --> 00:10:04.759 was a real problem, and I think there are some 165 00:10:04.799 --> 00:10:06.960 circumstances in which courts ought to look at that, but 166 00:10:08.200 --> 00:10:11.639 I don't think it holds up here textually or otherwise. 167 00:10:11.720 --> 00:10:15.039 Well, right, I mean you mentioned that black turnout has 168 00:10:15.080 --> 00:10:17.279 actually been higher than white turnout in a few recent 169 00:10:17.360 --> 00:10:19.840 national elections, and maybe that was a bomb on the 170 00:10:19.879 --> 00:10:22.840 ballot or Kamala Harris, but I think a more telling statistic. 171 00:10:23.399 --> 00:10:25.039 This is a little old, but I can't imagine it's 172 00:10:25.080 --> 00:10:28.480 gone backwards. But I remember when the Thornstroms, Abigail and 173 00:10:28.519 --> 00:10:32.000 Stephen Thornstrom, put out their blockbuster book American Black and White, 174 00:10:32.000 --> 00:10:34.679 which is now almost a thirty year old book. But 175 00:10:34.799 --> 00:10:37.759 what some of the figures they assembled, including something like this, 176 00:10:38.159 --> 00:10:40.639 but something like there were only one hundred black elected 177 00:10:40.679 --> 00:10:43.639 officials in the Southern States in nineteen sixty and by 178 00:10:43.679 --> 00:10:47.840 the nineteen ninety five there were several thousand. So I 179 00:10:47.879 --> 00:10:50.440 mean that just the country's changed, you said, And that's 180 00:10:50.519 --> 00:10:52.879 one indication of it. And I think the figure I 181 00:10:52.919 --> 00:10:54.720 read the other day, and I haven't gone and tried 182 00:10:54.759 --> 00:10:57.759 to check. You need Michael barn or Henry Olsen for this, 183 00:10:57.840 --> 00:11:01.000 but something like half of the black members of the 184 00:11:01.000 --> 00:11:05.039 House representatives today are actually from districts with a white 185 00:11:05.039 --> 00:11:07.840 majority or where the black population is a minority, which 186 00:11:07.879 --> 00:11:10.480 shows that you don't have to have a This is 187 00:11:10.519 --> 00:11:13.039 part of the racial essentialism of the left that is 188 00:11:13.080 --> 00:11:14.759 so destructive, and so it's a blow for that. 189 00:11:15.159 --> 00:11:17.720 But at the risk of beating a dead horse. All 190 00:11:17.759 --> 00:11:21.440 of this is very important politically, but it's not something 191 00:11:21.440 --> 00:11:24.799 the court should consider. That is to say, I saw 192 00:11:24.840 --> 00:11:28.679 some people saying, look at how the Republican Party has changed. 193 00:11:28.679 --> 00:11:33.559 In nineteen eighty two, they were happy to expand the 194 00:11:33.639 --> 00:11:36.480 Voting Rights Act. And in two thousand and two the 195 00:11:36.480 --> 00:11:39.480 Bush administration, maybe six two thousand and six, the Bush 196 00:11:39.519 --> 00:11:46.720 administration renewed the Voting Rights Act preclearance statute. And now 197 00:11:46.720 --> 00:11:49.519 it wouldn't even get a vote. That's where it matters 198 00:11:49.679 --> 00:11:54.080 that the country has changed. But it shouldn't matter here 199 00:11:54.320 --> 00:11:57.200 because the constitutional argument is and ought to be very clear, 200 00:11:57.200 --> 00:12:00.720 and it runs like this. The Fourteenth Amendment and the 201 00:12:00.720 --> 00:12:05.360 Fifteenth Amendment ban the use of race in government decisions. 202 00:12:05.960 --> 00:12:11.639 That is superior as a principle to all statutes, including 203 00:12:11.679 --> 00:12:16.159 at the state level. So the only way that you 204 00:12:16.240 --> 00:12:24.039 could have a constitutional ability to mandate, as Louisiana had 205 00:12:24.360 --> 00:12:32.519 been mandated, racial gerrymanders is if the Congress, acting under 206 00:12:32.519 --> 00:12:35.840 the auspices of the Fifteenth Amendment, did that, and it didn't. 207 00:12:36.320 --> 00:12:39.559 I mean, this is the thing, right, Like all of 208 00:12:39.600 --> 00:12:43.840 the hand waving falls at that point. It just didn't 209 00:12:43.879 --> 00:12:48.720 do it. It didn't you. You can't get past the 210 00:12:48.799 --> 00:12:52.559 fourteenth and fifteenth Amendments ban on the consideration of race 211 00:12:53.120 --> 00:12:55.919 unless Congress did it under the fifteenth Amendment. I just 212 00:12:55.960 --> 00:13:00.960 didn't do it. And to me, this is the big 213 00:13:01.399 --> 00:13:04.879 fight duris prudentially between left and right, and it's why 214 00:13:04.960 --> 00:13:08.080 on this topic I am so firmly on the right. 215 00:13:08.879 --> 00:13:12.399 I think that you either believe that the law is 216 00:13:12.440 --> 00:13:16.360 an objective thing that can be understood by the common man, 217 00:13:17.159 --> 00:13:19.600 and I don't say that disparagingly. That's the whole point 218 00:13:19.639 --> 00:13:23.000 of writing the law down is so that non lawyers, 219 00:13:23.600 --> 00:13:27.080 non commentators, can point to it in a court, can 220 00:13:27.200 --> 00:13:33.200 stand up and say no, it says here that I'm 221 00:13:33.240 --> 00:13:36.000 not expected to do that, and you can't do that. 222 00:13:36.080 --> 00:13:41.200 To me, the only point of having a rule of 223 00:13:41.279 --> 00:13:44.559 law is for that. And you know, if you read 224 00:13:44.600 --> 00:13:47.919 the dissent, there's a lot of harroring history in it 225 00:13:48.039 --> 00:13:50.960 that I really do believe we should be cognizant of. 226 00:13:51.799 --> 00:13:55.000 But it can't get past that basic fact that the 227 00:13:55.120 --> 00:13:58.600 law doesn't say what it had been assumed to have said. 228 00:13:58.919 --> 00:14:02.039 And you know, that's why I'm a conservative, and it's 229 00:14:02.039 --> 00:14:03.840 why I'm an originalist, and it's why I'm a text 230 00:14:03.879 --> 00:14:05.960 to list on statutute grounds, and it's why I really 231 00:14:06.039 --> 00:14:09.600 like this Supreme Court majority we have because time and 232 00:14:09.639 --> 00:14:13.039 time again that is their loads start. Is it in 233 00:14:13.080 --> 00:14:15.159 the law? No right that it doesn't count? 234 00:14:15.919 --> 00:14:16.080 Well? 235 00:14:16.120 --> 00:14:20.600 One last question to bring up on this. Having now 236 00:14:20.759 --> 00:14:23.000 planted the right flag in the right place on the 237 00:14:23.080 --> 00:14:26.639 Voting Rights Act and the application of the protection Clause, 238 00:14:27.559 --> 00:14:30.200 I think the next step is to revisit the doctrine 239 00:14:30.240 --> 00:14:32.960 of disparate impact, which we got from the Griggs case 240 00:14:33.000 --> 00:14:34.720 back in the seventies. Right, so you know, in the 241 00:14:34.759 --> 00:14:38.120 thumbnail sketches, disparate impact said if there's a I think 242 00:14:38.159 --> 00:14:41.679 the original intent was, if there's a statistical disparity between 243 00:14:41.679 --> 00:14:45.279 populations and employment schools or whatever, that would be a 244 00:14:45.279 --> 00:14:50.200 trip wire for investigating whether conscious race discrimination has taken place. 245 00:14:50.600 --> 00:14:52.600 Of course, it didn't stay there and longer than about 246 00:14:52.600 --> 00:14:57.879 thirty seconds, and disparate impact statistical variances became assumed to 247 00:14:57.879 --> 00:15:01.799 be proof that discrimination was taking place was taking place, 248 00:15:01.879 --> 00:15:06.960 and therefore the legal justification for race conscious remedies lots 249 00:15:06.960 --> 00:15:10.240 of consent decrease with corporation, cities, fire departments, et cetera. 250 00:15:11.159 --> 00:15:12.559 So, and I know, I don't. 251 00:15:12.840 --> 00:15:14.840 I've got to think somebody is working on a case, 252 00:15:14.879 --> 00:15:17.679 whether it's our friend Ed Bloom who brought the Harvard 253 00:15:17.679 --> 00:15:21.519 case or our friends at the New Civil Liberties Alliance 254 00:15:21.519 --> 00:15:22.840 who brought similar cases. 255 00:15:23.159 --> 00:15:23.960 But it seems to me. 256 00:15:23.919 --> 00:15:26.080 That that one ought to be next on the list 257 00:15:26.120 --> 00:15:28.360 of things to review and overturn. 258 00:15:28.600 --> 00:15:32.799 Yeah, because what you described is Zebram Candyism. That's Abram 259 00:15:32.879 --> 00:15:36.240 Kendy's view that if there is anything in the country 260 00:15:36.759 --> 00:15:41.879 that does not fall on perfectly mathematical lines, then it 261 00:15:41.960 --> 00:15:45.480 must be the product of racism. And that's absurd. Now, 262 00:15:45.519 --> 00:15:49.480 that's not to say, and Alito left room in this 263 00:15:49.559 --> 00:15:54.559 decision for extreme examples. That's not to say that there 264 00:15:54.639 --> 00:16:00.600 couldn't be a situation in which statistical imbalance is were 265 00:16:00.679 --> 00:16:03.960 the product of racism, and that the government would have 266 00:16:03.960 --> 00:16:06.960 a role in trying to remedy that. But the Greeks 267 00:16:07.000 --> 00:16:11.200 decision effectively says if there is any evidence for whatsoever, 268 00:16:11.919 --> 00:16:14.919 or there's an allegation even, that's how we must proceed. 269 00:16:14.960 --> 00:16:17.000 And you'll correct me if I'm wrong, But isn't that 270 00:16:17.240 --> 00:16:23.200 why we can't use is it IQ testing or Santa 271 00:16:23.240 --> 00:16:26.519 rized testing in the hiring of government officials. 272 00:16:26.480 --> 00:16:30.360 Well a lot of companies too. The testing regime is 273 00:16:30.480 --> 00:16:34.000 directly implicated on this. I mean, I do remember a 274 00:16:34.559 --> 00:16:38.600 chairman once of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission who said, yes, 275 00:16:38.639 --> 00:16:41.320 I've used disparate impact as a again as a trip wire. 276 00:16:41.480 --> 00:16:45.720 And then on close investigation we discover some obvious, conscious, 277 00:16:45.840 --> 00:16:50.279 deliberate discrimination for which there are remedies under the Civil 278 00:16:50.360 --> 00:16:53.360 Rights Act. And that EEOC chairman was a guy named 279 00:16:53.519 --> 00:16:54.240 Clarence Thomas. 280 00:16:54.399 --> 00:16:56.279 Yes, that's right there you go. Well, and we've got 281 00:16:56.279 --> 00:17:01.039 a problem too now because we're pretending once again that 282 00:17:01.200 --> 00:17:03.960 the country is the same as it was in nineteen 283 00:17:04.000 --> 00:17:07.000 sixty or eighteen sixty. And this is the great sin 284 00:17:07.319 --> 00:17:11.319 of Ibram Kendy and of Chinese coats. In my view, 285 00:17:12.160 --> 00:17:18.240 the poll tax was obviously designed to disenfranchise African Americans 286 00:17:18.359 --> 00:17:21.200 at a time where there was no money being put 287 00:17:21.240 --> 00:17:24.960 into public education for non whites. You can't have that 288 00:17:25.079 --> 00:17:27.799 system in a free country. But that's simply not the 289 00:17:27.839 --> 00:17:31.960 case anymore. In fact, quite the opposite is true, So 290 00:17:32.200 --> 00:17:35.680 that case should go. It's offensive to the Constitution, it's 291 00:17:35.680 --> 00:17:39.960 offensive to the Declaration of Independence. It's offensive to what 292 00:17:40.000 --> 00:17:42.880 we teach our children, which is to judge people based 293 00:17:42.920 --> 00:17:46.079 on the character, not on their race. And I hope 294 00:17:46.119 --> 00:17:48.559 I'm with you. I hope there's a case coming. 295 00:17:49.240 --> 00:17:52.480 Yeah, so Charlie, our guest is here, and so we'll 296 00:17:52.480 --> 00:17:55.279 have to draw a veil on the subject until some 297 00:17:55.319 --> 00:17:58.880 sequels that will inedibly arise. So we'll be right back. 298 00:18:03.119 --> 00:18:05.960 We welcome now to the podcast. Spencer Claven, the editor 299 00:18:06.000 --> 00:18:08.799 at large of The American Mind, associate editor of the 300 00:18:08.799 --> 00:18:13.240 Claremont Review of Books, and a prolific podcaster and substacker 301 00:18:13.759 --> 00:18:16.119 by on spent, I'm jealous of you, Spencer. How productive 302 00:18:16.160 --> 00:18:19.200 you are the author of two recent books and also 303 00:18:19.279 --> 00:18:22.720 several current articles, including one just out today Friday while 304 00:18:22.759 --> 00:18:25.640 we're taping that we'll talk about. One is How to 305 00:18:25.680 --> 00:18:30.640 Save the West, Ancient Wisdom for five modern crises. Also 306 00:18:31.079 --> 00:18:34.359 Light of the Mind, Light of the World, illuminating science 307 00:18:34.640 --> 00:18:36.119 through faith. So welcome, Spencer. 308 00:18:36.160 --> 00:18:37.599 How are you? Oh? 309 00:18:37.680 --> 00:18:41.480 Thanks, Steve, it's great. Sue doing well. It's a It's 310 00:18:41.519 --> 00:18:45.279 been a big, an eventful week, And all I can 311 00:18:45.319 --> 00:18:48.400 say is, don't don't envy me my productivity, it comes 312 00:18:49.000 --> 00:18:49.880 at a heavy costs. 313 00:18:50.759 --> 00:18:53.519 Yeah, I think I can understand that too. Uh So 314 00:18:53.839 --> 00:18:57.519 let's let's start with something that's uh topical. I mean, 315 00:18:57.559 --> 00:19:00.480 you've written these great pieces about the roots of Western civilization, 316 00:19:00.519 --> 00:19:02.000 and I want to spend a little time on that. 317 00:19:02.119 --> 00:19:04.480 But you have an article out today I just caught 318 00:19:04.559 --> 00:19:08.480 up with on this guy, Hassan Piker, who is no 319 00:19:08.599 --> 00:19:10.519 Piker when it comes to wokeness if I can make 320 00:19:10.559 --> 00:19:14.559 a pun. And I've heard about this guy, and I'm amazed. 321 00:19:14.599 --> 00:19:17.160 We're told that the era of wokeness was over, that 322 00:19:17.359 --> 00:19:20.079 peaked in twenty twenty, but from the looks of things, 323 00:19:20.359 --> 00:19:22.599 it is not over at all. So tell us a 324 00:19:22.599 --> 00:19:25.599 little bit about Piker and why you think he is, 325 00:19:26.839 --> 00:19:29.480 you know, the id of the Democratic Party or the 326 00:19:29.559 --> 00:19:31.119 left today. 327 00:19:31.200 --> 00:19:33.440 I said at the outset, I would really love to 328 00:19:33.480 --> 00:19:37.039 be wrong about this. So if you can, if you 329 00:19:37.039 --> 00:19:39.359 can persuade me that I am, I'd appreciate it. Like 330 00:19:40.200 --> 00:19:43.039 this seems like a pickle for the Democrats just from 331 00:19:43.079 --> 00:19:47.079 where I sit, because I've been following Hassan for a bit. 332 00:19:47.440 --> 00:19:49.759 He just had this big moment with the New York 333 00:19:49.799 --> 00:19:54.680 Times and Ezra Kleine wrote, I thought, really kind of 334 00:19:54.680 --> 00:19:59.119 gross article excusing him. He's a twitch streamer. If people 335 00:19:59.119 --> 00:20:02.400 don't know who he who he is, He's big in 336 00:20:02.480 --> 00:20:08.559 certain internet circles, Marxist, kind of clickable, very camera ready, 337 00:20:09.240 --> 00:20:12.839 sort of podcast bro, and he's been one of the 338 00:20:12.880 --> 00:20:16.599 candidates I think for the left Joe Rogan. That's how 339 00:20:16.759 --> 00:20:22.400 Climb framed him. But yeah, he was on the New 340 00:20:22.480 --> 00:20:25.039 York Times podcast. I guess it was with this writer 341 00:20:25.160 --> 00:20:30.279 Gia Tolentino, and the two of them were just kind 342 00:20:30.279 --> 00:20:35.039 of I mean, it was Champagne socialism on steroids, perhaps literally, 343 00:20:35.119 --> 00:20:37.920 since Piker's a big weightlifter, and they were just kind 344 00:20:37.920 --> 00:20:42.359 of joking together about micro looting and which is shoplifting basically. 345 00:20:43.920 --> 00:20:48.039 Charlie actually has an incredible piece about it at National 346 00:20:48.079 --> 00:20:51.000 Review if you want a full rundown of all the 347 00:20:51.039 --> 00:20:55.880 appalling things that were said. And I think for a 348 00:20:55.920 --> 00:20:59.640 lot of people not in the twitch very online world, 349 00:20:59.640 --> 00:21:02.519 this was first exposure to this guy and what he's like. 350 00:21:02.680 --> 00:21:05.839 But it wasn't actually the worst of how he can be. 351 00:21:06.079 --> 00:21:09.319 I mean, subsequently people have been seeing that he likes 352 00:21:09.359 --> 00:21:11.640 to joke about letting the streets run red with the 353 00:21:11.640 --> 00:21:14.519 blood of landlords, and he likes to call for the 354 00:21:14.559 --> 00:21:21.000 death of the public figures. He dislikes, you know, genuinely 355 00:21:21.079 --> 00:21:25.920 a bad guy. And what's funny about him is, like you, Steve, 356 00:21:26.000 --> 00:21:29.319 do a ton of podcasting, Charlie two, Like we all 357 00:21:29.599 --> 00:21:32.440 talk a lot on camera, so sometimes you say things 358 00:21:32.519 --> 00:21:35.960 that you don't you kind of regret afterwards. You're ranting 359 00:21:36.000 --> 00:21:38.880 a little bits very loose medium. You know, I can 360 00:21:38.920 --> 00:21:42.319 say with true confidence that you could search my entire 361 00:21:42.559 --> 00:21:46.079 recorded over and not once would you find me accidentally 362 00:21:46.480 --> 00:21:49.000 wishing that the streets would run red with the blood 363 00:21:49.039 --> 00:21:51.000 of my enemies. So we can kind of, I think, 364 00:21:51.000 --> 00:21:55.880 conclude this guy's the real deal. And what I proposed 365 00:21:55.880 --> 00:21:58.640 in that piece is that I don't I think people 366 00:21:58.640 --> 00:22:00.559 like Ezra Klin would really like to be rid of 367 00:22:01.039 --> 00:22:03.480 this wing of the Democrat Party, or at least for 368 00:22:03.519 --> 00:22:06.000 it to take a back seat. I think after Trump's 369 00:22:06.039 --> 00:22:09.559 twenty twenty four victory, there was a lot of soul's 370 00:22:09.640 --> 00:22:12.680 arching over did we go too far in the woke direction? 371 00:22:12.880 --> 00:22:15.079 Was this unpopular? Did we alienate a lot of our 372 00:22:15.119 --> 00:22:17.839 working class voters. Answers to all those questions seem to 373 00:22:17.839 --> 00:22:22.519 basically be yes, and that moment has sort of gone 374 00:22:22.559 --> 00:22:26.480 the way of the twenty sixteen moment, when the Democrats 375 00:22:26.519 --> 00:22:29.680 were so concerned about flying out to the flyover states 376 00:22:29.680 --> 00:22:33.039 and talking to your your average voter and figuring out 377 00:22:33.160 --> 00:22:36.960 just what this whole movement's about. Like it has proven 378 00:22:37.079 --> 00:22:40.119 really hard, I think for the Democrats to ditch the 379 00:22:40.119 --> 00:22:43.720 peak woke for a couple of reasons, one of which 380 00:22:43.799 --> 00:22:46.680 is that there's just a lot of energy and momentum 381 00:22:46.720 --> 00:22:51.160 and kind of esthetic appeal on the side of peak woke. 382 00:22:51.240 --> 00:22:53.680 Much as it might surprise us to learn this, like 383 00:22:53.960 --> 00:22:58.480 a lot of the attractive, young, passionate, stupid people of 384 00:22:58.480 --> 00:23:01.720 whom there are many, are kind of in this vein 385 00:23:01.799 --> 00:23:04.799 and following Piker. Obviously, he's got a huge, a huge following, 386 00:23:04.799 --> 00:23:08.079 and Piker is moving in the same circles as Alexandria, 387 00:23:08.200 --> 00:23:12.960 Cassio Cartez, as Rong Mom, Donnie, these very buzzy politicians 388 00:23:13.000 --> 00:23:15.680 who have you know, associated themselves with him and I 389 00:23:15.680 --> 00:23:18.000 think basically agree with most of what he has to say. 390 00:23:18.519 --> 00:23:21.759 On top of that, all the guys that would like 391 00:23:21.920 --> 00:23:25.319 to now be more moderate, or many of the Democrats 392 00:23:25.319 --> 00:23:27.000 that would like to be more moderate in the wake 393 00:23:27.039 --> 00:23:31.599 of Trump's second victory. Have the problem that when they 394 00:23:31.599 --> 00:23:33.720 thought Trump was gone forever, when they thought they had 395 00:23:33.759 --> 00:23:36.839 succeeded in banishing him from politics, that I'm talking about, 396 00:23:37.079 --> 00:23:41.480 Like you know, in the Biden years, after the fervor 397 00:23:41.519 --> 00:23:44.920 of twenty twenty, a lot of these guys went on 398 00:23:45.000 --> 00:23:49.839 camera and said things that now in retrospect look deranged. 399 00:23:49.880 --> 00:23:54.119 It's not just Kamala Harris, like, you know, let's trans 400 00:23:54.160 --> 00:23:56.960 the felons or whatever it was, let's give state sponsored 401 00:23:58.240 --> 00:24:02.759