Ben Shapiro LIVE from Vanderbilt University

[00:00:00] Good evening everyone. [00:00:02] My name is Noah Jenkins and I am the [00:00:04] president of Vanderbilt's Young [00:00:06] Americans for Freedom. [00:00:08] Thank you. [00:00:13] Before I begin, I'd like to thank some [00:00:14] folks for making tonight possible. Thank [00:00:17] you first to our amazing team here on [00:00:19] campus, especially George Justina, [00:00:20] hopefully he's in here to hear that, for [00:00:22] all their hard work. Thank you to Yap [00:00:24] National for all their support and to [00:00:26] the donor of the Things That Matter [00:00:28] lecture series. And last, but certainly [00:00:30] not least, thank you all for coming out [00:00:32] here this evening. [00:00:34] We stand on the verge of a new golden [00:00:37] age for the United States of America. At [00:00:40] YAF, we take pride in this fact as we [00:00:42] unite the best and brightest minds of [00:00:44] the conservative movement. Today, we [00:00:46] look to the future. We are characterized [00:00:49] by our youth and vigor and our vision [00:00:51] for our nation. While the results of [00:00:53] this past week's election have been [00:00:55] encouraging, such a result did not come [00:00:57] spontaneously. It instead is a [00:00:59] culmination of the yearslong work of our [00:01:01] guest tonight and other key voices in [00:01:03] the conservative movement. Many of whom [00:01:05] we through YAF have the honor of hearing [00:01:07] on our campuses. I'm sure many of you [00:01:10] will remember hearing the malefless and [00:01:12] doulsit tones of our wonderfully [00:01:13] articulate Michael Nolles this time last [00:01:15] year. But today it is our honor to host [00:01:18] a man who not only helped give a [00:01:19] platform to voices like Mr. Nolles, but [00:01:22] also revolutionized the conservative [00:01:24] media landscape. A man who needs no [00:01:26] introduction. You may know him from his [00:01:28] unmatched debate performances against [00:01:30] some of his toughest critics. You may [00:01:32] know him from his top rated daily show [00:01:34] where he offers a special kind of [00:01:36] political analysis that is rarely [00:01:38] matched. And you may even know him from [00:01:40] his groundbreaking media company, The [00:01:41] Daily Wire, which for the past decade [00:01:44] has continually provided cultural and [00:01:46] political wins for the conservative [00:01:48] movement. One of which, of course, is [00:01:49] the blockbuster documentary, Am I [00:01:51] Racist? Streaming on Daily Wire Plus. [00:01:53] Use promo code Trump. 47% off new annual [00:01:55] memberships. [00:02:01] But but now to get to the things that [00:02:03] matter, the name of this lecture series, [00:02:05] where Mr. Shapiro will cut through the [00:02:07] noise of our messy political discourse [00:02:09] to help return our country to the [00:02:10] fundamentals that truly matter. Ladies [00:02:13] and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to [00:02:14] bring to you tonight the one and only [00:02:16] Ben Shapiro. [00:02:20] [Applause] [00:02:23] [Music] [00:02:26] Hey, how's it going everybody? [00:02:29] How y'all doing? [00:02:35] Thank you. [00:02:40] Thanks so much. [00:02:47] Thank you so much for coming out [00:02:48] tonight. I start off by thanking folks [00:02:50] at Young America's Foundation. I also [00:02:52] want to thank the anonymous sponsor of [00:02:53] the things that matter series. I also [00:02:56] would be remiss if I did not shout out [00:02:58] all the people from our company who [00:02:59] showed up tonight. So, if you are a [00:03:01] Daily Wire employee, stand up and take a [00:03:04] bow cuz you're what makes all of it [00:03:05] possible. That's not I'm serious. There [00:03:07] are a bunch of people who came who [00:03:08] actually work at our company. You're [00:03:09] allowed. It's okay. You won't get fired. [00:03:11] Not this time. [00:03:18] And a special shout out to my homeboys, [00:03:21] my co-CE, the co-CEOs of the Daily Wire, [00:03:23] the people who actually do the daily [00:03:24] work of running this massive giant media [00:03:27] empire that we've built. Jeremy Boring, [00:03:28] Jeremy Boring, and Caleb Robinson are [00:03:30] over here. Stand up, guys. You recognize [00:03:33] that's not black Jeremy, that's white [00:03:34] Jeremy over there. And Caleb is the one [00:03:36] you've never seen, but is actually the [00:03:38] power behind the throne. So, thanks to [00:03:40] those guys. They're basically like my [00:03:41] brothers, which means this is the first [00:03:42] event of mine they've ever attended in [00:03:44] person. [00:03:46] I don't have any brothers, by the way. [00:03:47] Anyway, so let's talk about entering [00:03:50] America's golden age. So, first of all, [00:03:51] last week kicked ass. Yes, [00:03:56] that was just wonderful. It was just [00:03:58] wildly enjoyable. You know, it started [00:04:00] off as a tense night and then over the [00:04:02] course of the night, I just started to [00:04:03] get more and more giddy as I realized [00:04:06] that it wasn't just that the age of Joe [00:04:08] Biden was ending. It was a very short [00:04:09] age, but the age of Joe Biden, the only [00:04:11] age about Joe Biden that was short, the [00:04:13] the age of Joe Biden was ending. And you [00:04:16] know, it's been a bad four years. It [00:04:17] has. And you started to feel this [00:04:19] creeping sense of optimism, which was [00:04:21] totally unfamiliar to me. Uh I don't do [00:04:23] optimism. It's just not part of my [00:04:25] public profile in any way, shape, or [00:04:26] form. So, I wasn't sure at the beginning [00:04:28] if it was just indigestion. And then it [00:04:30] turned out, no, I was just happy. I [00:04:32] didn't know what it felt like, but it [00:04:33] was wonderful. And I think that the [00:04:35] reason that it felt so wonderful is that [00:04:37] for the first time in a long time, I [00:04:40] really feel that we are entering the [00:04:42] best days of America. You hear [00:04:43] politicians say this sort of stuff all [00:04:44] the time, right? [00:04:46] And the best of America's yet to come. [00:04:48] You think, well, is it though? Really? [00:04:51] But it actually feels right now like it [00:04:53] is. And it does feel like we are [00:04:56] entering a new golden age for the [00:04:58] country for three specific reasons. [00:05:00] Because there are three things that make [00:05:02] a golden age for a country or for a [00:05:04] civilization or even for an individual [00:05:05] in their in their life. What makes your [00:05:07] life good? Liberty, strength, virtue. [00:05:11] Liberty, strength, and virtue. These [00:05:13] three things build civilizations. They [00:05:15] make for golden ages. They make [00:05:18] countries, should we say, great again. [00:05:20] And it's odd that now the person who it [00:05:23] takes to make all of that happen is a [00:05:25] real estate mogul with odd hair and an [00:05:27] orange color. But that's what it is. [00:05:30] That is what it is. And I don't think [00:05:31] that the election was so much about [00:05:33] President Trump. It was obviously he's a [00:05:35] singular figure in American history as [00:05:37] much as it was about the American people [00:05:39] who were just done. We were just done. [00:05:41] We were done with the age of stagnation. [00:05:44] We were done with the age of moral [00:05:45] confusion. We were done with an age that [00:05:48] suggested that weakness was a substitute [00:05:51] for strength and that foolishness was a [00:05:54] substitute for virtue or that regulation [00:05:56] was a substitute for liberty. We're just [00:05:58] done with all that. It feels like we're [00:05:59] so done with that. Really does. And it's [00:06:03] awesome. [00:06:09] So, let's talk a little bit about those [00:06:10] three things. Liberty, strength, and [00:06:12] virtue. So, first of all, liberty. It [00:06:14] feels like we're entering an economic [00:06:16] golden age. Not just because the stock [00:06:17] market immediately soared upon the [00:06:19] election of President Trump, but because [00:06:21] the reason the stock market soared is [00:06:23] because there's a new sense of hope [00:06:24] among America's business class, among [00:06:27] workers, among everybody. Why? The [00:06:29] reason is because that what creates [00:06:31] economic power is in fact liberty. It is [00:06:34] not subsidies. It is not regulation. It [00:06:36] is liberty. It is economic freedom. The [00:06:39] basis of all economic growth is property [00:06:42] rights and liberty and innovation. It is [00:06:44] those things. You put those things [00:06:46] together, you get massive economic [00:06:47] growth. And it works literally anywhere. [00:06:49] You can actually just implant it [00:06:50] anywhere around the globe. You can take [00:06:51] a place that has no history of [00:06:53] capitalism like South Korea and turning [00:06:55] and turn it into a boom town by simply [00:06:57] adding property rights and liberty and [00:06:59] innovation. You add those things and [00:07:00] suddenly one of the poorest places in [00:07:02] the world becomes one of the most [00:07:03] prosperous places in the world. And [00:07:05] that's true in the United States as [00:07:07] well. And we've been told the opposite. [00:07:09] We've been told that property rights are [00:07:10] a form of theft. Right? stupid Marxist [00:07:13] idea that property rights are a way of [00:07:17] essentially cramming your beliefs and [00:07:19] your power down on somebody else. But [00:07:21] the whole system of property rights is [00:07:22] designed so that anyone can own property [00:07:24] and that we can build property. And one [00:07:26] of the things that I did during this [00:07:27] election cycle is I went out and I [00:07:29] campaigned with a number of Senate [00:07:30] candidates and it took me all over the [00:07:32] country and it was really fascinating. I [00:07:33] I went all the way up to northern Ohio [00:07:35] with Senator Bernie Mareno. I went all [00:07:36] the way down to the Rio Grand Valley, [00:07:38] which is right on the border with Mexico [00:07:40] with Senator Ted Cruz. And the [00:07:41] constituencies are totally different [00:07:43] ethnically. You go up to Northern Ohio, [00:07:44] it's super white. You go all the way [00:07:46] down to the real Grand Valley, the place [00:07:47] we were in, that county is 97% Hispanic. [00:07:50] And what they wanted was the same exact [00:07:52] thing. They wanted hope to build wealth [00:07:55] for their future. That's the thing they [00:07:57] wanted. They didn't want it handed to [00:07:58] them. They didn't believe that [00:08:00] government check was a substitute for [00:08:02] actual work. They didn't believe that [00:08:05] the best they could hope for was sort of [00:08:07] a basic standard of living provided by [00:08:09] an overweening power at the top. What [00:08:12] they believed is that if they were given [00:08:14] the opportunity to succeed, they would. [00:08:16] They had the self-confidence that it [00:08:18] takes to succeed because property rights [00:08:21] have to be combined with the liberty to [00:08:22] exercise those property rights. And that [00:08:24] liberty means the liberty to risk it [00:08:26] all. The liberty to succeed or fail. [00:08:28] When we built our company, we literally [00:08:30] started it in Jeremy Boring's pool [00:08:32] house. It was a pool house. You can go [00:08:34] back and look at our first episode. It's [00:08:35] like me against a curtain with one [00:08:37] camera. It looks absolutely awful. And [00:08:40] we built a a company that will do 230 [00:08:42] 240 $250 million in revenue this year. [00:08:45] Okay, that is something that everyone is [00:08:47] capable of. Not in exactly the same way. [00:08:49] We all have different hopes, [00:08:49] aspirations, dreams, interests. But if [00:08:52] you put your mind to it, if you work [00:08:54] hard, if you make smart decisions, and [00:08:56] if you get a little bit lucky, if you're [00:08:57] willing to risk, you can make so much [00:08:59] money, you can be so prosperous, you can [00:09:01] be so wealthy, you can be so successful [00:09:02] in this country. And that is still true. [00:09:04] And anybody, right or left, who tells [00:09:07] you different, who tells you you can't [00:09:08] get ahead in the United States of [00:09:09] America is lying to you for political [00:09:11] gain. It is that simple. It's just our [00:09:14] job to make sure the politicians and the [00:09:16] people who want to run your life don't [00:09:18] get in the way. Because what does that [00:09:20] allow for? allows for innovation. Now, [00:09:22] there's something that President Trump [00:09:23] said during his victory speech that was [00:09:25] kind of a throwaway line that everybody [00:09:26] ignored, but it wasn't a throwaway line [00:09:28] at all. He was talking about Elon Musk [00:09:30] who is just amazing. I mean, Elon Musk [00:09:32] is unbelievable. Right? I've had chance [00:09:34] to spend time with Elon. He is a [00:09:36] different cat. That is for sure. And [00:09:38] what I always say about Elon personally [00:09:40] is whenever you you speak with Elon, [00:09:41] it's sort of like watching an alien [00:09:43] coming to analyze the human species. [00:09:45] That's how that's how he talks to you. [00:09:46] He talks to you and you can see him sort [00:09:47] of breaking you apart down into your [00:09:49] constituent components and trying to [00:09:50] figure out why you work so weird, right? [00:09:53] But that weird brain, Elon's strange [00:09:55] brain, creates things like giant 22tory [00:09:58] rockets that can then be captured by [00:10:00] enormous chopsticks from the air. And [00:10:03] it's unbelievable. I mean, it's amazing. [00:10:05] This this human being is responsible for [00:10:07] not only the most successful space [00:10:08] company on earth, but also the most [00:10:10] successful car company, electric car [00:10:12] company on Earth, and also runs the most [00:10:14] successful social media company on [00:10:16] Earth. That's an amazing thing. So [00:10:17] anyway, Donald Trump calls out Elon Musk [00:10:19] in the crowd and he says, you know, we [00:10:20] have to we have, you know, we have to do [00:10:22] Elon, you're a star. We have to protect [00:10:24] our geniuses, right? And everybody kind [00:10:27] of laughs, protect our geniuses. That's [00:10:29] really important. That's really [00:10:30] important. Liberty means we have to let [00:10:33] geniuses be geniuses. In fact, we should [00:10:35] help geniuses achieve their very best. I [00:10:38] have a a sort of test that I use when [00:10:41] I'm determining whether somebody is [00:10:42] smart or whether somebody is a [00:10:44] It's a pretty good test. The test goes [00:10:45] like this. Would you rather be the [00:10:48] dumbest person in a very smart society [00:10:50] or the smartest person in a very dumb [00:10:52] society? Every single smart person I [00:10:54] know says they would rather be the [00:10:55] dumbest person in a smart society. Why? [00:10:58] Because you get a lot of cool stuff in a [00:11:00] smart society. In a smart society, [00:11:02] people are innovating. They're making [00:11:03] awesome things. If you're the smartest [00:11:05] person in a dumb society, well then you [00:11:07] have like the nicest cave. But it's way [00:11:10] better to have all the nicest things [00:11:12] being the biggest failure in society, [00:11:14] which is why you have to let geniuses [00:11:16] thrive. Everything in economics starts [00:11:17] off as a luxury and then finally it [00:11:19] becomes a necessity. All the things that [00:11:21] we consider necessities in our daily [00:11:23] lives originally start off as luxuries. [00:11:25] Most obvious example being your cell [00:11:26] phone. If you go back and you watch Wall [00:11:28] Street, you see Gordon Gecko walking [00:11:30] around with a cell phone that looks like [00:11:31] a boom box, right? With and he he's [00:11:34] super rich, right? He's the only person [00:11:35] on earth who has a cell phone. He's [00:11:37] walking around on the beach with this [00:11:38] giant shoe box attached to his head. And [00:11:40] that was a luxury. That was a luxury [00:11:41] item. And now that is a necessity. If [00:11:43] you miss your cell phone for 5 minutes, [00:11:44] you don't know what to do. That's [00:11:46] because innovation by geniuses creates [00:11:49] products. Those products then are [00:11:51] competed with by other people who are [00:11:52] smart. the price comes down and suddenly [00:11:55] all this magic is in your pocket. And it [00:11:57] is. We're such an ungrateful society [00:11:59] that we look at the things we have, we [00:12:01] think, "Oh my god, I can't believe it's [00:12:02] it's it's so bad." Are you kidding me? [00:12:04] If you dropped a person from the year [00:12:06] 1900, just on Earth today, they would [00:12:09] literally think they were in an alien [00:12:10] civilization. You can go on a piece of [00:12:13] machinery in your pocket, hit a couple [00:12:15] of buttons, or just talk to it, and a [00:12:17] product will arrive at your door inside [00:12:19] of a day that you were looking for [00:12:20] sourced from 25 different countries. [00:12:22] It's insane. That's the power of [00:12:24] innovation. And that's what's being [00:12:25] unlocked right now. We should be excited [00:12:27] about that. Innovation should be [00:12:29] exciting. Business, entrepreneurship, [00:12:31] this stuff should be exciting to us. And [00:12:33] it is exciting. And that's why you see [00:12:34] the market soaring. So, liberty. Second, [00:12:37] strength. So, we've lived in an era [00:12:39] where people apologize for the strength [00:12:40] of the United States. Let me just say [00:12:42] something about the strength of the [00:12:43] United States. The world only has [00:12:46] freedom and prosperity because of the [00:12:47] United States of America. Only. Okay. It [00:12:50] is the threat of military force or the [00:12:53] use of military force by the United [00:12:54] States of America that keeps the world [00:12:56] free, safe, and prosperous. It is simply [00:12:59] that. That's all. There is no one else. [00:13:01] If the United States disappeared [00:13:02] tomorrow, the world would decay into [00:13:04] darkness almost overnight. Everyone [00:13:07] knows this. They're not willing to say [00:13:08] it because it's uncomfortable. But [00:13:10] that's why it's very, very important [00:13:11] that America continue to kick ass. If [00:13:14] America ever stops doing that, the world [00:13:16] will become a significantly worse place. [00:13:17] American power is not bad. American [00:13:19] power is wonderful. In fact, it is one [00:13:22] of the great things that has happened in [00:13:23] the history of humanity. American [00:13:25] strength is fantastic. Now, that doesn't [00:13:28] mean that we have to intervene [00:13:29] everywhere around the globe. It doesn't [00:13:31] mean that we have to get involved in [00:13:32] every place. Doesn't mean that we have [00:13:34] to get involved in every war or fight [00:13:36] the so-called forever wars, which is [00:13:37] usually a misnomer because when people [00:13:39] say forever wars, they never count [00:13:40] things like the occupation of Germany, [00:13:42] which continues until today, or the [00:13:44] occupation of Japan or the occupation of [00:13:45] South Korea. We still have air bases and [00:13:47] military bases in literally all of these [00:13:49] places. We don't consider that a forever [00:13:50] war anymore because those places turned [00:13:52] into thriving democracies with workable [00:13:54] economies. With that said, there are [00:13:58] certain fundamental principles that [00:13:59] apply to the strength of the United [00:14:00] States. You know, President Trump, a lot [00:14:02] of people look at President Trump during [00:14:03] his first term like, "Oh my god, it was [00:14:04] such a mess. It was so chaotic." Well, [00:14:06] anybody who looks at his foreign policy [00:14:07] realizes Donald Trump was responsible [00:14:09] for the best foreign policy of any [00:14:11] president in my lifetime. Bar none. Not [00:14:13] close. End of story. [00:14:18] And you could tell that because the [00:14:21] minute that he left office, Joe Biden [00:14:23] proceeded to set all of it on fire. And [00:14:25] you got massive wars on two separate [00:14:27] continents. You got a China encroaching [00:14:30] on Taiwan. You had Russia that was [00:14:33] expanding its sphere of influence. You [00:14:35] saw competitors rising. That's what [00:14:37] happens in the absence of American [00:14:38] strength. So what is the people act as [00:14:40] though this is all an accident. It's [00:14:41] not. Trump actually does have a [00:14:42] doctrine. He doesn't express it like a [00:14:44] doctrine, but he does actually have a [00:14:45] doctrine. And so the doctrine can be [00:14:47] encoded in a story that I've told [00:14:48] before. So I did a fundraiser for [00:14:49] President Trump a few months back and [00:14:51] President Trump was talking about [00:14:52] Ukraine. And man, he he is he is one [00:14:57] different person, Donald Trump. Anyway, [00:14:59] so Donald Trump was telling this story [00:15:01] about Ukraine. He says, "You want to [00:15:03] know, Ben, why Russia never invaded [00:15:05] Ukraine while I was president? You want [00:15:07] to know?" Like, "Sure, Mr. President." [00:15:09] He goes, "Well, the reason is because I [00:15:11] called up Vladimir Putin. I said, "Blad, [00:15:13] bland, blad, don't you go into don't go [00:15:16] into Ukraine, Vlad, if you go into [00:15:18] Ukraine, I'm going to bomb the [00:15:22] And Vladimir Putin," he says, "Mr. [00:15:24] President, no you won't." And I said, [00:15:25] "Well, I might." [00:15:29] And then Trump turns to me and he says, [00:15:31] "And here's the thing. If there's a 5% [00:15:33] chance the United States of America is [00:15:34] going to bomb the you don't do it." [00:15:38] Okay? Now, most of us wouldn't express [00:15:40] that as sort of a doctrine. It's not a [00:15:42] foreign policy tome. It's not a PhD [00:15:45] thesis, but it does encapsulate four [00:15:48] separate principles actually if you [00:15:50] think about it for more than half a [00:15:52] second. Number one, America is governed [00:15:54] by her interests. We have very specific [00:15:56] interests. Okay, those interests are not [00:15:58] vague things like democracy and freedom. [00:16:00] Heck, we're not Wilsonian. Wilsonianism [00:16:02] is a is a foolish attempt to encapsulate [00:16:05] hard American foreign policy interests [00:16:07] in some sort of glowy rhetoric that [00:16:09] makes people feel all warm and fuzzy on [00:16:10] the inside. But if you take a look at [00:16:11] American foreign policy, obviously [00:16:13] things like democracy and freedom, while [00:16:14] we strive for those things overall in [00:16:17] every single moment, are not necessarily [00:16:18] the things the United States is striving [00:16:19] for. The United States allies with bad [00:16:21] people sometimes to oppose worse people [00:16:23] because foreign policy is a very messy [00:16:25] area, for example. So American interests [00:16:28] can be anything from the freedom of the [00:16:29] seas which ensures America's global [00:16:32] military and economic dominance to not [00:16:35] allowing rogue powers to threaten [00:16:38] American allies in say the Middle East [00:16:40] to threaten oil supplies in Saudi Arabia [00:16:42] to threaten military power in Israel. It [00:16:44] can include things like China not [00:16:46] threatening Taiwan because Taiwan [00:16:47] happens to be the largest producer of [00:16:49] sophisticated semiconductors on the [00:16:51] planet. It includes things like, yes, [00:16:53] Russia invading Ukraine because Russia [00:16:55] on the borders of the rest of the NATO [00:16:57] powers would be a grave threat and them [00:16:59] controlling more of the oil flow into [00:17:01] Europe would allow them to cudle more [00:17:03] countries into their rather nefarious [00:17:06] sphere of influence. Right? These are [00:17:07] all American interests. So number one, [00:17:08] America has actual real interests that [00:17:10] ought to be described. Two, we have to [00:17:13] calibrate our response to each of these [00:17:14] interests. They're not all equivalent. [00:17:16] Okay? We have interests all over the [00:17:17] globe, but not all of them are that [00:17:18] important, right? Perhaps we're [00:17:20] interested in whether a small country in [00:17:23] South Africa turns slightly more [00:17:25] democratic. But we're not going to [00:17:26] invest tons of resources there if it [00:17:28] doesn't really matter very much to [00:17:29] American citizens. American citizens [00:17:31] come first. American interests come [00:17:33] first. And so we have to calibrate our [00:17:35] sacrifice and the things we're willing [00:17:36] to do to our actual interests in these [00:17:38] places, which makes perfect sense [00:17:40] because all resources are scarce. Our [00:17:42] money is scarce. Our material is scarce. [00:17:44] And most of all, the blood of our [00:17:46] American men and women who stand in the [00:17:48] breach. That is the scarcest and most [00:17:49] precious thing of all. And so if you're [00:17:51] going to expend that stuff, you better [00:17:52] have to have a damn good reason to do [00:17:53] it. Okay? So that is point number two. [00:17:55] We have American interest. And two, you [00:17:56] calibrate the means to the actual size [00:17:58] of the interest. Three, if you're going [00:18:00] to go, you use every means at your [00:18:02] disposal to achieve your interests. You [00:18:04] don't fail. So that means if you're [00:18:06] going to contain Iran, you use maximum [00:18:08] pressure to contain Iran and you allow [00:18:11] your allies to smack them so hard upside [00:18:13] the head they don't do it again. Right? [00:18:15] If you are going to go to war, then [00:18:16] you'd say exactly as our, I hope, soon [00:18:19] to be Secretary of Defense, Pete Hgse, [00:18:21] has said, if you have to go to war, you [00:18:24] make the war short and brutal, right? [00:18:26] That the best kind of a war is the war [00:18:28] that is short. And usually it requires [00:18:29] brutal in order to achieve short. That [00:18:31] doesn't mean that you go out of your way [00:18:32] to harm civilians, God forbid. It [00:18:34] doesn't mean that you don't do your best [00:18:36] to keep war as antiseptic as possible, [00:18:37] but war is hell. It was meant to be [00:18:39] hell. There's no way to avoid it being [00:18:40] hell. And so, what that means is the [00:18:42] biggest sin in war is losing. If you're [00:18:44] going to go, you go hard and you go hard [00:18:46] until it's over. And you don't stop [00:18:48] until it's over. And finally, the final [00:18:51] principle is you let everyone know the [00:18:53] first three principles. You let everyone [00:18:55] know this, right? Because most wars [00:18:58] start not by mistake, but because of [00:19:00] miscalculation of relative power. [00:19:03] Virtually all war begins because one [00:19:05] side mistakenly believes it can defeat [00:19:07] the other side or do significant damage [00:19:09] to the other side. So if you make clear [00:19:11] things like if you cross this red line, [00:19:14] it's not a bluff. I will punch you so [00:19:16] hard in the face that you will not get [00:19:18] up. That red line will not be crossed. [00:19:20] The worst thing you can do is what Joe [00:19:21] Biden has done, which is just get up [00:19:22] there and go, "Don't do it. Don't do [00:19:24] it." And then everybody does it. And [00:19:26] then he's like, "Well, but not this [00:19:28] time. Don't do it." Now, it turns out [00:19:30] nobody believes you. The credible threat [00:19:32] of use of force is the basis for all [00:19:34] solid foreign policy. And if you express [00:19:37] all of that, then you barely ever have [00:19:39] to use military force. It turns out the [00:19:41] best dissuader to the use of military [00:19:44] force by your enemies is their knowledge [00:19:46] that they will get absolutely wrecked if [00:19:48] they try it. F AFO is a fantastic [00:19:50] foreign policy. Strength. Okay. Finally, [00:19:54] virtue. You want a thriving golden age [00:19:56] in America, you actually do need a [00:19:57] restoration of actual virtue. That means [00:20:00] people acting like responsible human [00:20:01] beings with actual real roles and duties [00:20:04] in the world. So, we've all been brought [00:20:06] up to believe that the thing that's [00:20:08] important is for us to feel a sense in [00:20:10] every moment of personal enjoyment. And [00:20:12] that's the thing that really matters is [00:20:14] how we feel on the inside at this exact [00:20:16] and the world is supposed to conform to [00:20:17] our wants, needs, and desires. That is a [00:20:20] recipe for a failed civilization. A [00:20:22] successful civilization recognizes from [00:20:24] the time that you are born, there are [00:20:25] certain roles that you were born to [00:20:27] fulfill. And these roles are often [00:20:28] unrewarding and they're often difficult [00:20:30] and they are often replete with with [00:20:33] hardship. And you have to do them [00:20:36] anyway. And when you do those things, [00:20:38] this is what makes you a virtuous [00:20:39] person. This is what makes you a good [00:20:41] worthwhile person. I've said many times [00:20:43] before that if you want to see what's [00:20:44] meaningful to people in life, that the [00:20:46] best place to go to determine what's [00:20:48] meaningful in life, go to a cemetery and [00:20:49] read the headstones. It never says felt [00:20:51] a sense of personal satisfaction on the [00:20:54] headstones. Right? Really h really had [00:20:56] feelings that were that were justified [00:20:59] by the world. You don't see pronouns on [00:21:01] headstones. Okay? What you do see on [00:21:03] headstones are roles. You see things [00:21:05] like father, mother, beloved sister, [00:21:08] beloved husband, beloved wife, right? [00:21:11] Those are the things that matter in [00:21:12] life. They will always matter in life. [00:21:13] They will never stop mattering in life. [00:21:16] Virtue is built into those roles. Which [00:21:18] means that a virtuous civilization [00:21:20] raises its daughters to be wives and [00:21:22] mothers and raises its sons to be [00:21:24] fathers and husbands. This is not [00:21:26] controversial. It should not be [00:21:28] controversial. If it is controversial, [00:21:29] it's because you're doing it wrong. [00:21:31] Okay. The most important thing in life [00:21:32] to me is not what I do for a living. It [00:21:35] is what I do for my family. It is me as [00:21:37] a husband to my wife and a father to our [00:21:39] four children. If force is the only [00:21:41] thing really that matters to me in life, [00:21:44] right? It is not just like a thing. It [00:21:46] is not just the most important thing. It [00:21:47] is by far the most important thing I [00:21:49] will ever do in my life. And that's true [00:21:52] for anybody who wishes to live a [00:21:53] virtuous life. That is a universal rule. [00:21:55] It doesn't mean you have to do it. You [00:21:56] cannot do it. It's your choice. It's a [00:21:58] free country and it's a free [00:21:59] civilization. But the bulk of the [00:22:00] population does have to at least [00:22:01] acknowledge that we are not apathetic [00:22:03] about how we live our lives. And we are [00:22:05] not apathetic about what standards of [00:22:07] virtue ought to be applied in our [00:22:08] individual lives. Because if you're not [00:22:10] building a civilization around [00:22:11] successful families, the civilization [00:22:13] falls down. Edmund Burke suggested this [00:22:17] 200 years ago when he was talking about [00:22:19] the idea that families are the little [00:22:22] platoon upon which civilization is [00:22:23] built. Because you're willing to do [00:22:24] things for your kids, you're not willing [00:22:26] to do for anyone else. You're willing to [00:22:27] do things for your spouse you're not [00:22:28] willing to do for anyone else, right? [00:22:30] You go out and you achieve. You go out [00:22:33] and you defend. You go out and you build [00:22:35] on behalf of your family. That is [00:22:37] absolutely necessary. And that means [00:22:38] that you have to enact those roles in [00:22:40] your life. And we have to be a society [00:22:41] that values those roles. Again, it is [00:22:43] not a matter of apathy how everybody [00:22:46] lives their life. I'm not apathetic [00:22:48] about it. Doesn't mean people should be [00:22:49] prosecuted for violating my rules. [00:22:50] Doesn't mean I'm talking about using [00:22:52] government coercion to make you do the [00:22:54] things I want you to do. I'm saying a [00:22:55] civilization that does not value as top [00:22:57] priority family and these roles that I'm [00:22:59] talking about is doomed to fail your end [00:23:01] of story whether we like it or not. That [00:23:03] is the iron law of reality. That also [00:23:06] means that the way that we get together [00:23:07] as a community is in places like [00:23:11] churches. Because you know where these [00:23:12] virtues typically have come from? [00:23:13] They've not come from people [00:23:14] rationalizing them out. That's not where [00:23:16] people get what they do on a daily [00:23:18] basis. Most of us don't get up in the [00:23:20] morning and think to ourselves, I need a [00:23:21] 2-hour justification, a a logical point [00:23:24] by point on why I ought to be a good [00:23:26] father today and what that constitutes. [00:23:28] The reason that you act in a particular [00:23:30] way is because you were inculcated in a [00:23:31] certain civilization in a certain set of [00:23:33] values. Now, we've been cut off from [00:23:35] those values, right? Western [00:23:36] civilization now is essentially like cut [00:23:38] flowers in a vase, right? The flowers [00:23:40] were thriving. They were in the garden. [00:23:42] They had roots and then we cut them off [00:23:43] from their roots. We put them in a vase [00:23:44] and they stayed fresh for a while and [00:23:46] then they started to wither. Well, now [00:23:48] it's time to re-mbed them in the soil. [00:23:50] It's time for them to regrow their roots [00:23:52] and reconnect with those roots. If those [00:23:54] values reconnect with the roots, they [00:23:55] will be healthy again. And the biggest [00:23:57] root for all of this is your church. It [00:23:59] is your synagogue. It is biblical [00:24:01] values. That is the baseline reality of [00:24:03] our civilization. Whether we like it or [00:24:05] not, whether you believe it or not, it [00:24:07] happens to be the case. Your values [00:24:09] didn't spring to you full-fledged in the [00:24:10] middle of the night. You didn't wake up [00:24:12] at 3:00 in the morning and logic out how [00:24:14] you're living. You got it from your [00:24:15] parents. You got it from their parents. [00:24:17] And probably all of those parents, you [00:24:18] go back far enough, got it from their [00:24:20] local church. And that local church got [00:24:22] it in all likelihood from the Bible. [00:24:24] Okay, that is the way that Western [00:24:26] civilization has developed. And that the [00:24:28] beautiful thing about it is you can [00:24:29] rediscover it literally any time. Just [00:24:31] go down to the bookstore and buy a copy [00:24:33] of the Bible or apparently steal it. [00:24:35] It's literally the most stolen book in [00:24:37] in literally all of civilization. The [00:24:38] Bible is stolen more often every year [00:24:40] than any other book in civilization, [00:24:42] which see which means people should [00:24:43] probably, you know, read it after they [00:24:44] steal it and then maybe they'll go and [00:24:45] pay. But in any case, [00:24:48] these three thing these three things, [00:24:50] liberty, strength, and virtue, these are [00:24:51] what's going to save Western [00:24:52] civilization. And you can feel it. You [00:24:54] can feel there's a hunger because for a [00:24:56] long time, we were told that we didn't [00:24:57] need any of these things. Liberty could [00:24:59] be outsourced to a government that cared [00:25:01] about you, that was empathetic toward [00:25:02] you, that felt you. Strength could be [00:25:05] outsourced to others. You didn't have to [00:25:06] go out and chief. You didn't have to [00:25:08] have an army that was going to defend. [00:25:10] The western world is a nice place filled [00:25:11] with wonderful people who are certainly [00:25:13] not going to try to burn down your [00:25:14] civilization from without and within. We [00:25:17] were told that you could abandon virtue [00:25:19] in favor of whatever floated your boat, [00:25:21] whatever you felt like. And you know [00:25:22] what we ended up with? We ended up with [00:25:23] emptiness. We ended up with stagnation [00:25:25] in the economy. We ended up with a [00:25:27] chaotic foreign policy with nefarious [00:25:29] powers on the march. And we ended up [00:25:31] with an emptiness inside of us, a [00:25:33] god-shaped hole that none of this was [00:25:35] going to fill. Well, that era is over. [00:25:38] It's time for something new. I can feel [00:25:40] it. I think a lot of people can feel it. [00:25:42] I think it's why the election went the [00:25:43] way that the election went last week. [00:25:45] And I only hope that it's the beginning [00:25:46] because if it is, the golden age is upon [00:25:48] us and we're all going to get to enjoy [00:25:50] it together. Thanks so much. Happy to [00:25:51] take your questions. [00:26:05] Okay, we're now going to switch into the [00:26:06] Q&A portion of the evening. If you have [00:26:08] any questions, we ask that you line up [00:26:10] back here and when you come up, state [00:26:12] your name and your brief question. [00:26:14] And as always, my rule is if you [00:26:16] disagree with anything, it doesn't have [00:26:17] to be about this speech, anything. You [00:26:19] get to raise your hand and go to the [00:26:20] front of the line if you disagree [00:26:21] because it's more fun. [00:26:27] [Applause] [00:26:31] Mr. Shapiro, thank you for coming to [00:26:33] Vanderbilt tonight. Thank you very much. [00:26:35] Thank you for what you've done for the [00:26:36] conservative movement. My question is [00:26:38] regarding the collapsing birth rates in [00:26:40] the West. What do you see as a solution [00:26:42] to that both culturally and [00:26:44] economically, maybe even outside of the [00:26:46] church as our society gets more and more [00:26:49] atheistic over time? Thank you. [00:26:51] Okay. So, there have been a lot of [00:26:52] attempts. This is sort of an area of [00:26:54] controversy inside the conservative [00:26:55] movement uh is is this idea that that [00:26:58] you can sort of jog people into having [00:26:59] more babies through economic benefits. [00:27:02] I'm fine with that. I mean, if we want [00:27:03] to try that as a as a method, I'm I'm [00:27:05] totally fine with that on the state or [00:27:06] local level, for example. They've tried [00:27:08] it in Hungary. They've been able to [00:27:09] artificially boost the birth rate [00:27:10] slightly. They've been saying things [00:27:11] like if you have four kids, then you now [00:27:14] have no income tax, which sounds, by the [00:27:15] way, amazing to me. I have four kids. I [00:27:17] would love not to pay my income tax. [00:27:18] That sounds unbelievable. Would that [00:27:20] incentivize me to have another kid? [00:27:21] Probably not. Okay. The real reason that [00:27:23] I I mean maybe we will anyway but it's [00:27:25] not going to be because of that. You [00:27:26] know the the real reason that people [00:27:27] have kids typically speaking is not [00:27:29] because they are because they can afford [00:27:32] it and maybe that is the case now on the [00:27:34] margins. The reality is that the places [00:27:36] well if you want to see where people are [00:27:37] having kids you actually can look where [00:27:39] people are having kids and the answer is [00:27:40] who's having kids in the United States? [00:27:42] Who has above replacement rates of [00:27:43] fertility? Religious Catholics, [00:27:45] religious Protestants, religious Jews, [00:27:48] religious Muslims, religious Mormons. [00:27:50] Right? That's like almost the complete [00:27:51] list in the United States. You may [00:27:53] notice the word religious before each of [00:27:55] those descriptors. Okay. So, the reality [00:27:57] is people have kids because the first [00:27:58] commandment in the Bible is in Hebrew pu [00:28:01] or vvu that you should be fruitful and [00:28:02] multiply. The reason people used to have [00:28:04] because there are all sorts of economic [00:28:05] incentives back in 1600 to have kids, [00:28:07] right? And a bunch of kids so they could [00:28:08] work your farm and you needed some [00:28:10] insurance. So, if like you had nine and [00:28:11] three of them died, you still had six. [00:28:12] You could work the farm. Then maybe some [00:28:14] of them would get a dowy and you'd be [00:28:15] able to live out your retirement with [00:28:16] one of your kids. And then thanks to the [00:28:18] welfare state and increasing [00:28:21] increasing survival rates for children, [00:28:23] the incentive structure economically [00:28:24] went down to have tons and tons of kids. [00:28:26] And so you had to have another reason to [00:28:27] have kids. And it turns out the only [00:28:29] people who apparently had a real reason [00:28:30] to have kids were people who felt a [00:28:32] religious obligation to have kids. I do [00:28:33] not think you're going to restore birth [00:28:35] rates in the West unless you have that. [00:28:38] Now, this doesn't mean that everybody [00:28:39] who is is having lots of kids has to be [00:28:41] religious. So I'll take the only case of [00:28:44] a western country that has above [00:28:46] replacement rates of fertility right [00:28:47] now. There's only one literally on [00:28:48] earth. It's Israel. Okay? In Israel, [00:28:51] they have above replacement rates of [00:28:52] fertility. Even in places like Tel Aviv, [00:28:54] Tel Aviv, for those who don't know, is a [00:28:55] very secular area of Israel. Basically [00:28:57] has the value system of San Francisco. [00:28:59] It's very much to the left. But because [00:29:01] everybody in Israel has four kids, [00:29:04] everybody in Tel Aviv has three. There's [00:29:06] a sort of social acceptability that's [00:29:07] built in. And it means that the [00:29:09] community really parents if you're ever [00:29:10] in a park in Israel, it's very I mean, [00:29:11] first of all, Israelis are are very loud [00:29:12] and they're very rude. I mean, they're [00:29:13] wonderful. I love them, but they're very [00:29:15] loud and very rude. And one of the [00:29:16] things they will do is if there's a kid [00:29:17] on the playground who's acting like a [00:29:18] jerk, somebody else who's not you will [00:29:20] actually discipline your kids. There's [00:29:21] just an entire value system built around [00:29:23] the raising of kids. You see this in [00:29:24] certain places in America, too, where [00:29:26] you have above replacement rates. If you [00:29:27] create a culture in which having kids is [00:29:29] not just seen as sort of like, oh, I [00:29:31] have my two and they're going to be my [00:29:33] little model children on Instagram. You [00:29:35] have to embrace the mess. You have to [00:29:36] embrace the suck. Anybody who has lots [00:29:38] of kids knows it's really, really, [00:29:40] really hard. It's hard. Kids are [00:29:41] difficult and they're also really [00:29:43] rewarding. Sometimes the difficulty [00:29:45] overweighs the rewarding. You still have [00:29:46] to do it. And I think that only in the [00:29:48] presence of a higher value system does [00:29:50] that happen. I don't think signing a [00:29:51] check alone can do it. Signing again, [00:29:52] I'm not against it, but signing a check [00:29:53] alone ain't going to fix it. [00:29:54] Thank you very much. [00:30:01] Hey Ben, my name is Jake. Thank you for [00:30:03] being here. uh your discussion on [00:30:06] American strength only really revolved [00:30:08] around the threat of force. Now Trump [00:30:11] has discussed that he wants to force [00:30:13] other NATO countries to pay and if they [00:30:16] do not then he will not provide [00:30:18] protection. To me that seems like a zero [00:30:20] sum game. um either we don't pay for or [00:30:23] we don't protect them if they don't pay [00:30:25] or we do not uh maintain maintain the uh [00:30:31] you know security of NATO in the areas [00:30:32] that we're not protecting. [00:30:33] And so if you were going to do some game [00:30:34] theory, it wouldn't be a zero sum game. [00:30:36] This would actually be a game of [00:30:36] chicken, right? So So he he does use a [00:30:39] bunch of of sort of threats of of [00:30:41] economic threat as well. I mean, I [00:30:42] talked about kind of choking out the [00:30:43] Iranian economy. So economic threat can [00:30:45] sometimes be very useful as well or [00:30:47] economic measures that are taken against [00:30:49] a wide variety of America's opponents. [00:30:50] Um when it comes to NATO, President [00:30:53] Trump when he says that sort of stuff, [00:30:55] it the very threat did get many of those [00:30:57] European countries to actually increase [00:30:58] the percentage of GDP that they were [00:31:01] spending on NATO. So did he actually [00:31:03] want to just destroy NATO? If he wanted [00:31:05] to destroy NATO, he would have walked [00:31:06] out of NATO. He actually did have the [00:31:07] power to do that. You know, but he [00:31:09] didn't do that. Instead, what he was [00:31:10] doing, and this is true, by the way, of [00:31:11] his tariffs. I hear a lot of people [00:31:12] talking about his tariff plans. My god, [00:31:13] he's going to put 20% tariffs on [00:31:15] everything. No, he's not. He's not going [00:31:16] to do that. You know what he's going to [00:31:17] do? He's going to do exactly what he did [00:31:19] in Trump 1.0, which is use tariffs as [00:31:21] leverage, right? There's a story that [00:31:23] that I heard that's actually a pretty [00:31:24] good story about President Trump [00:31:25] negotiating with Justin Trudeau. Uh, and [00:31:28] apparently the story goes like this. I I [00:31:31] can't vouch for personally, but I have [00:31:32] it on pretty good authority. So, [00:31:33] apparently, President Trump was [00:31:34] negotiating with Justin Trudeau, uh, the [00:31:36] the handsome Bernie Sanders of Canada, [00:31:39] and and almost undoubtedly Fidel [00:31:40] Castro's son. That's the one conspiracy [00:31:42] theory I believe. In any case, uh Justin [00:31:45] Justin Trudeau was negotiating [00:31:46] negotiating over a trade deal and [00:31:48] apparently Justin Trudeau didn't want to [00:31:49] cave on a particular point. So Trump [00:31:50] says, "Get him in here. Get Justin." So [00:31:52] they bring Justin in. And uh and Trump [00:31:54] says to him, "Justin, what's the one [00:31:56] thing that I could do that would totally [00:31:57] destroy your economy?" And Trudeau's [00:32:00] like, "Well, I mean, if you you know, [00:32:01] sir, if you if you tariffed our [00:32:02] automobiles, that would be really bad." [00:32:04] And Trump says, "Justin, first rule of [00:32:06] negotiation, don't tell the person [00:32:08] across the table from you what's the one [00:32:10] thing they could do to destroy your [00:32:12] economy [00:32:14] because let me tell you, Justin, I don't [00:32:15] care about the Canadian economy. I care [00:32:17] about the American economy. So, if you [00:32:19] don't give me what I want, I'm going to [00:32:20] tear up every automobile that comes [00:32:22] across the border." [00:32:24] And then apparently Trudeau sort of gave [00:32:26] in. And then later, they were supposed [00:32:27] to have like a joint presser signing uh [00:32:29] signing a bill or something, signing a [00:32:31] treaty. And uh and right before Trump [00:32:33] reaches over into his into his coat [00:32:35] pocket and he takes out like a Matchbox [00:32:37] car and he says, "Justin, I want you to [00:32:39] keep this on your desk always so you'll [00:32:40] remember the lesson you learned here [00:32:41] today." [00:32:44] So in other words, he he likes to use he [00:32:46] leverage. It's leverage. I mean, you can [00:32:48] call it threat, you can call it [00:32:49] leverage. It's it's just leverage. [00:32:50] Understandable. Thank you. [00:32:51] Thank you. [00:32:57] Um my name is Andy. I'd like to ask a [00:33:00] question. First of all, thank you for [00:33:01] coming here to share your views. We all [00:33:03] appreciate your time. My question is [00:33:05] just to propose a hypothetical, these [00:33:06] are not my beliefs. This is simply a [00:33:08] devil's advocate. If you have an issue [00:33:10] like abortion where there are some case [00:33:12] studies that could suggest that um [00:33:15] legalizing abortion can be good for an [00:33:16] economy with regards to things like [00:33:18] crime, do you think your moral belief [00:33:20] should come first in precise when [00:33:22] deciding policy versus what could be [00:33:24] best for our country? [00:33:25] Yes, absolutely. So that this is the [00:33:26] so-called freconomics arguments. There [00:33:28] was an argument made in the book for [00:33:29] economics that suggested that if you [00:33:31] wish to lower crime rates, you actually [00:33:32] should increase abortion because you [00:33:33] could basically do a sort of uh minority [00:33:36] report pre-rime thing. Now, it happened [00:33:39] to be kind of racist because the the [00:33:40] basic suggestion is that if there was [00:33:42] abortion that was higher in minority [00:33:43] communities, if you killed enough black [00:33:45] pre-born children was the suggestion. I [00:33:47] mean, this is actually infreconomics [00:33:48] that this would essentially, you know, [00:33:50] lower the crime rates. Well, that's [00:33:52] evil. Okay, for forget about utilitarian [00:33:54] or not. It's evil. It turns out a lot of [00:33:55] things are utilitarian, right? If you [00:33:57] kill all the disabled, probably that [00:33:58] helps your economy also that makes you a [00:34:00] Nazi like an actual honest to god [00:34:02] horrific human being Nazi who should get [00:34:03] the death penalty. So are we supposed to [00:34:05] make decisions about efficacy on the [00:34:07] basis of doing things that are evil, [00:34:09] right? Should can we enslave our fellow [00:34:10] human beings because I mean it wouldn't [00:34:12] help the economy by the way, but if you [00:34:14] if you could make even if you could make [00:34:15] that argument, would that make it moral? [00:34:17] Absolutely not. Absolutely not. So I [00:34:19] think that's that is I've heard that [00:34:20] argument before. I think it's the single [00:34:21] I know you're not making it. It's the [00:34:23] single worst argument for abortion is [00:34:24] the idea that it creates economic [00:34:26] efficiency because that's also true of [00:34:28] like killing everyone above the age of [00:34:29] 85 probably. I mean like you could do [00:34:31] all sorts of tremendously evil things [00:34:33] that would help the economy which is why [00:34:35] helping the economy is not the number [00:34:37] one standard for virtue. It's not even a [00:34:38] standard of virtue really. [00:34:41] Thank you. Appreciate it. [00:34:48] Hi. Thank you for coming to our campus. [00:34:50] My name is Megan. I just have a question [00:34:52] about something that you said. You state [00:34:54] that American people come first and [00:34:56] foremost. American values, American [00:34:58] virtues, but you openly support [00:35:01] platforms that take away trans people [00:35:04] rights and openly do not agree with the [00:35:07] fact that men can become women, women [00:35:08] can become men. [00:35:09] Uh, so number one, that's not taking [00:35:11] away anyone's rights. That's a [00:35:12] recognition of reality. [00:35:14] Also, 2 plus 2 equals 4 is not a [00:35:16] reversal of anybody's rights. [00:35:19] like anybody's anybody's opinion of what [00:35:22] they are that runs counter to the actual [00:35:24] facts of the situation. You have a right [00:35:26] to say what you want to say, but you [00:35:27] certainly do not have a right to demand [00:35:28] that everybody else say it with you. And [00:35:31] that's a viol. You want to talk about a [00:35:32] violation of first amendment rights or [00:35:34] violation of basic American rights. [00:35:35] Trying to use the power of government as [00:35:37] so many people on the left have to force [00:35:38] everybody to say things are false in the [00:35:40] name of your personal comfort. That's a [00:35:42] violation of rights. [00:35:43] But to force people to do something for [00:35:45] your own personal comfort doesn't [00:35:47] infringe the same amount of rights. What [00:35:48] am I forcing you to do? Or anybody else [00:35:50] who's trans? [00:35:51] Not be who they feel that they should [00:35:52] be. They're not telling you. [00:35:53] No. I I mean, you can you can be [00:35:55] anything you want to be. I mean, but you [00:35:57] can't be, let's put it this way, you can [00:35:59] think whatever you want to think about [00:36:00] yourself. You can't be anything you want [00:36:01] to be. You can't be Napoleon. You can't [00:36:03] be Jesus. And you can't be a member of [00:36:04] the opposite sex. I mean, the the the [00:36:06] facts of life are the facts of life. and [00:36:09] declaring that that everyone else should [00:36:12] simply go along with what is in fact a [00:36:14] counterfactual statement, a delusion, [00:36:16] that's a violation of everybody else's [00:36:18] rights. So the idea that you get to [00:36:19] project onto everybody else your [00:36:21] perception of self is so wild and [00:36:23] bizarre a suggestion that it erodess the [00:36:25] basic standard of truth and fact that is [00:36:27] that is literally the basic for any even [00:36:30] human conversation to take place. If we [00:36:31] can't even tell what words mean anymore, [00:36:33] if my own the only perception that [00:36:34] matters is my own, that is the essence [00:36:36] of narcissism. It's just you in a mirror [00:36:38] looking at yourself and then demanding [00:36:39] that everybody else say about you what [00:36:41] you wish to say about yourself. That's [00:36:43] not reality. And by the way, it's not [00:36:44] even kind to you. Because it turns out [00:36:46] that one of the realities of life is [00:36:48] that you will live a happier and better [00:36:50] life if you understand and agree with [00:36:53] reality rather than fighting it. Reality [00:36:55] always wins. Whether you like it or not, [00:36:56] reality always wins. [00:36:58] So, in the same way that um I guess [00:37:02] people kind of have to accept that they [00:37:04] won't be accepted. You're taking [00:37:07] it's not about being accepted. It's [00:37:08] about you you have to accept if let's [00:37:10] say if you're a male and you believe [00:37:11] that you're a female or you're a female [00:37:12] and you believe that you're a male, [00:37:13] you're going to have to accept the [00:37:14] baseline reality that what you think is [00:37:16] false about you. Okay? If I think that [00:37:18] I'm an amazing basketball player, no [00:37:20] matter how strongly I think it, it's not [00:37:22] true. And it's going to be I can think [00:37:24] that as much as I want to think it. And [00:37:25] the minute I get on the basketball court [00:37:27] and I put up a jumper that gets blocked [00:37:29] by some dude who's 6'5, [00:37:31] right? Then everybody's going to realize [00:37:33] I just wasn't that good at basketball. [00:37:34] And no matter what I thought about [00:37:35] myself, I still wasn't good at [00:37:36] basketball. That's a reality. [00:37:38] Do you think it's fair for the [00:37:40] government to take those rights away? [00:37:42] Again, I you haven't defined even what [00:37:44] the right is that you're talking about? [00:37:45] You do not have a right to dictate to me [00:37:46] what I think of you. You certainly do [00:37:48] not have a right to dictate to me what I [00:37:50] think about reality, especially when [00:37:52] what I think reflects reality and what [00:37:53] you think does not. [00:37:54] I'm not trying to convince you of [00:37:55] anything. It's kind of like the [00:37:57] government's trying to tell the people [00:37:58] that they can't do something. [00:38:00] You can do what you want to do. You just [00:38:02] can't dictate to anyone else what they [00:38:03] do about it. That's the that that's how [00:38:06] that's how human relations work. [00:38:07] How come you can do the same thing? I [00:38:09] I don't even understand the question. [00:38:10] I'm not doing the same thing. I'm not [00:38:12] I'm not forcing you to do anything. I'm [00:38:13] literally not forcing you to do [00:38:14] anything. I'm telling you to leave me [00:38:16] alone. [00:38:17] [Applause] [00:38:30] Damn. [00:38:39] Well, thank you, Mr. Mr. Shapiro, for [00:38:42] showing up today. Um, I'm, you know, one [00:38:45] thing I will give you is that you're a [00:38:46] very nuanced thinker when it comes to [00:38:48] ethics. I heard you're writing a book on [00:38:50] role ethics, which I think would be very [00:38:52] interested. I'm interested in reading it [00:38:54] when it comes out. However, at the end [00:38:56] there, I was a little disappointed with [00:38:57] the lack of nuance with your claim that [00:38:59] somehow ethics has to stem from [00:39:02] Christian values. So, I'm going to ask [00:39:04] you, can ethics exist without Christian [00:39:06] values? And then add another question. [00:39:08] Yes, it certainly can. And when I say [00:39:10] that no what I said is that the basis of [00:39:12] western civilization happens to be [00:39:14] Christian values that is true right [00:39:16] that's a historical fact right Tom [00:39:18] Holland talks about this in Dominion for [00:39:20] example this is very well substantiated [00:39:22] just historically speaking can you live [00:39:23] an ethical life without being Christian [00:39:26] I mean I'm doing it can you live an [00:39:27] ethical life without being Jewish sure [00:39:29] you can live an ethical life without [00:39:30] being religious absolutely is that [00:39:32] scalable it is not scalable [00:39:34] what do you mean by scalable [00:39:35] I mean that it works for people [00:39:36] individually it does not work it does [00:39:39] not work at scale. Religion tends to be [00:39:42] the only thing that works at scale in [00:39:43] instilling values. [00:39:45] Okay. And then my final followup, can [00:39:47] ethics exist without religion? [00:39:49] Again, ethics can exist independent of [00:39:50] religion. Although again, I think that [00:39:52] it lacks a logical basis in the sense [00:39:54] that at least religion says this thing [00:39:56] is right because there is a body that [00:39:58] create there's a thing that created you, [00:40:00] the world, and ethics that you owe an [00:40:02] allegiance to. The problem with with [00:40:04] ethics as sort of derived in in godless [00:40:06] fashion is that you can make an argument [00:40:08] and I may agree with it about what's [00:40:09] ethical and what's not. But there's no [00:40:11] way to actually bridge I mean this is [00:40:12] the David Hume observation. There's no [00:40:14] way to to bridge the gap from is to [00:40:16] ought from the the random facts of the [00:40:19] world to how you ought to act in any [00:40:21] particular way. It doesn't mandate that [00:40:23] you do the thing. I may agree you should [00:40:24] do the thing, but it doesn't actually [00:40:25] mandate you do the thing as opposed to [00:40:27] religion which says you do the thing [00:40:28] because God told you to do the thing. I [00:40:31] take back my critique. [00:40:39] All right, cool. So, admittedly, Trump [00:40:41] has had some success using tariffs and [00:40:44] sanctions as a threat, and he's done [00:40:45] okay with it sometimes as far as using [00:40:47] that as a point of leverage. But in my [00:40:48] admittedly brief period of research [00:40:50] before asking this question, I came [00:40:52] across a video from you in 2018 [00:40:54] lambassing against tariffs. And I think [00:40:56] to use your words that um we need to [00:40:59] protect our geniuses and free market [00:41:01] capitalism and I believe fundamentally [00:41:02] tariffs go against that. So do you think [00:41:05] that Trump will actually implement [00:41:06] tariffs and how would you evaluate his [00:41:08] proposed plan? [00:41:09] Okay. So there only two I agree [00:41:10] generally I don't like tariffs. Okay. As [00:41:12] a general rule I think the tariffs are [00:41:13] not in fact enriching to the economy [00:41:15] that they supposedly protect. They [00:41:16] generally tend to create overfat [00:41:19] industries that are then uncompetitive [00:41:20] when you remove the tariffs and they tax [00:41:22] all the rest of the population on behalf [00:41:23] of the protected industry that that is [00:41:26] that is being you know essentially [00:41:27] protected by by the tariffs. Now there [00:41:30] are two situations in which I think [00:41:31] tariffs are useful. One let's say that [00:41:33] you have China stealing intellectual [00:41:34] property and you're going to leverage a [00:41:36] tariff against them in order to get them [00:41:37] to stop doing that. So using it as a [00:41:39] method of leverage I agree with [00:41:41] particularly with an unfriendly power. [00:41:42] And second, there might actually be [00:41:44] industries that are so vitally necessary [00:41:46] for military readiness, for example, [00:41:48] that even if they are economically [00:41:50] uncompetitive, you can't offshore them [00:41:52] because if you offshore them, that would [00:41:53] create a significant gap in your supply [00:41:55] chain. So, for example, you need to be [00:41:56] able to create the steel at home or [00:41:59] within close range that allows you to [00:42:01] build the tanks and the ships and the [00:42:02] things that you actually need to build, [00:42:04] right? So what you might do is protect a [00:42:05] domestic infant industry in the United [00:42:07] States to build all of that stuff up [00:42:08] because you don't want to be reliant on [00:42:10] a supply chain that can be severed [00:42:11] pretty quickly by an American opponent. [00:42:13] So basically to protect security and to [00:42:15] use as leverage against nations that are [00:42:17] not playing by the rules. Those are the [00:42:18] two purposes of tariffs. Otherwise, as a [00:42:19] general rule, I don't like tariffs and I [00:42:20] think that they are bad for economics. [00:42:22] Yeah, I agree with you. But just based [00:42:23] upon an intellectual standpoint, I don't [00:42:24] have any data to back this up [00:42:25] admittedly, but I think we do have the [00:42:27] readiness as far as military [00:42:29] preparedness and defense in terms being [00:42:30] self-sustaining. Actually, an enormous, [00:42:32] believe it or not, an enormous amount of [00:42:33] the inputs, particularly in the tech [00:42:35] sector for for even the American [00:42:36] military are still made in China. Uh, [00:42:38] which is actually a major major problem. [00:42:41] Biden did do the micro the chips act, [00:42:42] right? [00:42:42] No, not so so they're trying to they're [00:42:44] trying to ramp up the chips like chip [00:42:47] manufacturing facilities in the United [00:42:48] States through the chips act. I think [00:42:50] that the easier way to to do that would [00:42:51] be to protect Taiwan, right? The vast [00:42:53] majority of again the sophisticated [00:42:54] semiconductors, the microchips that [00:42:56] we're reliant upon are made in Taiwan. [00:42:57] 92% of all sophisticated semiconductors [00:42:59] on planet Earth are manufactured by TSMC [00:43:02] in Taiwan. I'm not sure how fast we can [00:43:04] ramp it up here or whether we're going [00:43:05] to be able to quickly enough because [00:43:06] TSMC keeps advancing. We're advancing [00:43:08] too and we're not quite keeping up with [00:43:09] them even if we start off from the [00:43:11] beginning. But yeah, there there's [00:43:12] serious gaps in our supply chain for [00:43:13] sure. [00:43:14] All right. Thanks. [00:43:15] Thank you. [00:43:19] Uh hi. Uh my name is Azra. Thank you for [00:43:22] coming here. Uh Elon makes more than [00:43:24] half of his cars in China and Chinese [00:43:26] consumers buy almost as many Teslas as [00:43:28] Americans and Elon is very close to many [00:43:31] top Chinese officials. Do you think this [00:43:33] would influence the new Trump innovation [00:43:35] when it comes to its capabilities on [00:43:37] realizing its promises on China when it [00:43:39] comes to tariffs, Taiwan, etc.? No, I [00:43:42] mean I I think that you know that there [00:43:43] could theoretically be a conflict there [00:43:45] obviously between Elon and Trump if they [00:43:46] if they disagree on what China policy [00:43:49] ought to look like because of the the [00:43:51] you know Tesla's interest in in China. I [00:43:54] think that Trump is quite properly [00:43:56] extremely skeptical of China as as a [00:43:59] rising opposing power. I think that that [00:44:02] has become increasingly under Trump. [00:44:04] This is one of the few bipartisan things [00:44:05] that has actually happened under Trump. [00:44:06] Both Democrats and Republicans have [00:44:07] started to realize the rising threat of [00:44:09] China. So yeah, again if if it comes [00:44:11] down to, you know, I I think it's a [00:44:12] simplification because I'm not sure [00:44:14] exactly what what you know the sort of [00:44:16] Tesla Musk policy would be on China uh [00:44:19] in terms of the American government [00:44:21] policy. But if that comes to a conflict [00:44:22] between taking a harsher stance on China [00:44:24] that is more proTrump or taking an [00:44:26] easier stance on China that's more pro [00:44:27] Musk, I will always take the harder [00:44:28] stance on China, which I think is a [00:44:30] nefarious power in the world, steals [00:44:32] American IP at an exorbitant rate, funds [00:44:34] all of its building with debt, and then [00:44:37] proceeds to leverage it down on a [00:44:38] billion people and keep an enormous [00:44:40] number of those people essentially [00:44:41] locked in in a country they would prefer [00:44:43] to escape. I mean one when we talk about [00:44:45] you know help our geniuses. One of the [00:44:46] things China does is they literally [00:44:48] revoke travel visas for an enormous [00:44:50] number of high IQ people because they're [00:44:52] afraid of brain drain and they should be [00:44:53] afraid of brain drain because if you're [00:44:54] a really smart capable person do you [00:44:56] really want to stay in a place where you [00:44:57] know if you if you cross the regime you [00:44:59] end up in a in a camp somewhere which [00:45:01] happens on on the regular over there. [00:45:03] Well, in in in that regards, do you [00:45:05] think it's a mistake for Trump to take [00:45:07] Elon's money and his supporters because [00:45:09] uh uh well, it seems like um [00:45:13] No, I don't. And the reason I don't is [00:45:15] because all politics is coalitional. It [00:45:17] would be a mistake if Trump would then [00:45:18] exceed to bad policy requests from Musk. [00:45:21] That's not quite the same thing as [00:45:22] having a confluence of interests that [00:45:24] overlaps efficiently to, you know, in a [00:45:26] binary system allow Trump to become [00:45:28] president. If if if Trump then starts [00:45:30] to, I would say, subsume his own [00:45:32] priorities in favor of priorities that [00:45:34] are wrong, then that would be a problem. [00:45:35] All right. Thank you. [00:45:36] Thank you. [00:45:43] All right. What's up, Mr. Shapiro? So, [00:45:45] my name is Jonah. I've I've seen you for [00:45:47] a couple years now. I mean, we disagree [00:45:49] about stuff, so I'm not looking to like [00:45:51] break some ground cuz I don't think [00:45:52] nothing's going to change. But I guess [00:45:54] like my question would be you're talking [00:45:56] about these like familial values and [00:45:57] everything and about how that's [00:45:59] important. That's what makes America [00:46:00] what it is, a great society. But you're [00:46:03] you openly endorse a candidate are [00:46:04] celebrating a candidate's win who has [00:46:07] had four wives, cheated on all of them [00:46:09] and has [00:46:10] three wives. Three, [00:46:11] sorry, excuse me. I I I don't have the [00:46:14] facts the way you do, but I mean I think [00:46:16] we've all seen the videos. They said not [00:46:18] to repeat the language, but you know, he [00:46:19] talks pretty bad about women. [00:46:21] He does. He has said many things that I [00:46:23] do not like. Sure. I mean, so here's the [00:46:25] thing. When it comes to our politicians, [00:46:27] I have a general view of my politicians. [00:46:28] They're not my priests. They're not [00:46:29] pastors. They're not my rabbi. I don't [00:46:31] look to politicians as my moral [00:46:32] exemplars. And anybody who looks to a [00:46:34] politician as their moral exemplar is [00:46:36] doing life wrong. If you've ever met a [00:46:38] politician, you certainly should not be [00:46:39] looking to them as the person who's [00:46:40] going to inculcate values in you. You [00:46:43] should be looking to your local [00:46:44] religious leader. Hopefully your [00:46:45] parents. If I were to talk about the [00:46:47] people who actually inculcated values in [00:46:48] me, it wouldn't even be a rabbi. It [00:46:50] would be my mom and dad, right? And I [00:46:51] think that's true for the vast majority [00:46:52] of people. So Donald Trump is a plumber. [00:46:55] I don't really care about his personal [00:46:56] life because he's fixing the toilet. So [00:46:58] as long as the toilet gets fixed and he [00:47:00] unclogs the toilet that Joe Biden [00:47:02] clogged, I really don't care very much [00:47:05] about his personal life. Would I prefer [00:47:06] that he live a cleaner personal life [00:47:07] along the lines of my personal sense? [00:47:09] Sure, that would be great. I'm not [00:47:10] apathetic about, you know, the state of [00:47:12] sin, but I'm also not his confessor. [00:47:14] He's not going to have to answer to me [00:47:16] when he when he dies and then goes to [00:47:17] heaven or hell, right? That's not that's [00:47:18] that's beyond me. The one thing I want [00:47:21] from him is to do the things I want him [00:47:22] to do because I'm paying his salary, the [00:47:24] salary that he's not taking, but I voted [00:47:26] for him. I supported his campaign. He is [00:47:28] he is my servant in Washington. It is [00:47:30] not the other way around. That's how [00:47:31] public service works. And so, do I care [00:47:34] that much about his personal life? Am I [00:47:35] going to like worry about Melania and [00:47:37] her feelings? I mean, that's between [00:47:39] them. You know, they like I don't look [00:47:41] at, by the way, this true of all [00:47:43] celebrities. I've never looked at a [00:47:44] celebrity couple and they break up or [00:47:45] they're having trouble like, "Oh my god, [00:47:46] what does this mean for my marriage? Oh [00:47:48] no. Oh no. I can't believe that Kristen [00:47:50] Patter Stewart and Robert Patterson [00:47:52] never made it. What what what does this [00:47:53] mean? You mean you know JLo and Ben [00:47:55] Affleck? If if those two if those two [00:47:57] love birds can't make it happen, what [00:47:59] does it mean? None of this matters to me [00:48:00] at all. I don't care at all. That's not [00:48:02] what I want from them. I want them to [00:48:03] make nice faces on screen in plotfilled [00:48:06] movies. And I want Donald Trump to fix [00:48:07] the toilet. [00:48:09] Okay. Well, can I follow that up? [00:48:14] I can't follow that up with you. [00:48:19] Hi. Um, thank you again for being here, [00:48:21] Mr. Shapiro. Um, my name is Anvvesa and [00:48:24] so my question that I have for you is [00:48:25] how do you dispel the fear that the [00:48:26] country is getting more divided and with [00:48:28] the recent election results we might see [00:48:30] the rise of extreme ideology ideology [00:48:32] and related behaviors with that. [00:48:33] So I think that one of the amazing [00:48:35] things about this election is actually I [00:48:36] see I think you're seeing some of the [00:48:37] reverse meaning that because Trump won [00:48:39] and because he won so stunningly meaning [00:48:42] he won outside shares of minorities [00:48:44] particularly. He won 47% of Hispanics [00:48:46] which is amazing. It's the highest [00:48:47] percentage of Hispanics in in modern [00:48:49] history. He won, I think, 23% of black [00:48:52] men. He won in in particularly religious [00:48:54] Jewish areas. He in religious Jewish [00:48:56] areas, he won almost 100% of the vote. [00:48:57] In in heavily Jewish areas, he was [00:48:59] winning somewhere between 40 and 50% of [00:49:00] the vote like New York, New Jersey, [00:49:02] Pennsylvania, Michigan. Because he won [00:49:05] with this really diverse coalition, I [00:49:07] think it's causing the left particularly [00:49:08] to step off the ledge maybe and think [00:49:10] about whether they wish to keep doubling [00:49:12] down on identity politics. Like you're [00:49:13] not seeing the sort of resistance [00:49:14] insanity you saw in early 2017, late [00:49:17] 2016. You're not seeing millions of [00:49:19] people in the streets like, "Oh my god, [00:49:20] you're not seeing the hats and the [00:49:22] people screaming at the moon." And [00:49:23] honestly, I wish they would do more of [00:49:24] it cuz it's great content for my show, [00:49:25] but they're really not doing it as much. [00:49:27] And I think the reason for that is [00:49:29] because once you realize that the reason [00:49:31] you lost is cuz you were crazy, maybe [00:49:33] you should stop being so crazy. And the [00:49:35] thing about Trump and the thing about [00:49:36] his campaign this time, the thing that [00:49:38] nobody mentioned, I mean, I mentioned it [00:49:39] because, you know, I'm really good at my [00:49:40] job, but the thing that nobody else [00:49:41] mentioned about this election is that [00:49:43] Donald Trump ran as a moderate in this [00:49:45] election. He ran as an actual honest to [00:49:47] god moderate on the issue of abortion. [00:49:49] He said, "The federal government is not [00:49:50] involved in the issue of abortion. I'm [00:49:51] going to veto national legislation on [00:49:53] abortion." Right? When it came to [00:49:55] samesex marriage, he took it completely [00:49:56] out of the Republican platform. Right? [00:49:58] Much of this is stuff that I politically [00:50:00] may disagree with on like a principled [00:50:01] level. He did it because he was running [00:50:03] as he actually occupied the center of [00:50:05] the political square because the [00:50:07] Democrats had abandoned it. So they now [00:50:09] have a choice. They can either go even [00:50:10] crazier, right? And then follow Joy Reed [00:50:11] and AOC down the rabbit hole or they [00:50:14] can, you know, kind of be clubbed back [00:50:15] into sanity and we could actually have [00:50:17] maybe two parties that are not crazy, [00:50:18] which would be awesome. I would love [00:50:19] that. [00:50:21] Thank you. [00:50:28] Hi, Ben. Thank you for coming. My name [00:50:29] is Isaac. Um my question builds off of [00:50:32] your answer to one of the previous [00:50:33] questions. You were talking about how um [00:50:36] in previous western society and in [00:50:38] societies that are currently having [00:50:40] above replacement rate uh birth rates uh [00:50:43] you describe them as virtuous and you [00:50:45] describe them or talked about how they [00:50:46] have religion woven into their fabric of [00:50:48] their society. Um given that [00:50:50] constitutionally the United States is [00:50:52] not allowed to establish a state [00:50:54] religion. Um do you have a vision for a [00:50:57] realistic way that the government could [00:50:59] push society uh more towards the [00:51:00] virtuous direction that you were [00:51:01] describing? [00:51:02] Absolutely. So the number one way that [00:51:03] they could do that is universal school [00:51:05] vouchers at the state level. Literally [00:51:07] the number one way to do that. Okay. [00:51:09] Because the reality is that if you want [00:51:10] to build social fabric, if you want to [00:51:11] build churches, that doesn't happen top [00:51:12] down. It's not the president of the [00:51:14] United States who makes religious [00:51:16] policy. That stuff tends to happen [00:51:17] bottom up. Which is why the founders [00:51:19] actually built the system the way that [00:51:20] they did. Right? The first amendment [00:51:21] originally, by the way, only applied to [00:51:22] the federal government. It literally [00:51:24] says Congress shall make no law [00:51:25] abridging freedom of speech, freedom of [00:51:27] the press, freedom of religion, right? [00:51:28] The the reason that it says that or [00:51:31] establishing religion. The the reason [00:51:33] that the that the constitution is [00:51:36] written that way is because many of the [00:51:37] states at the founding actually did have [00:51:38] established religions. And then then [00:51:40] many of the states took that up and they [00:51:42] said, "We're not going to establish [00:51:42] religion either." But the idea of like [00:51:45] local communities really valuing [00:51:46] religion highly is a wonderful thing. So [00:51:49] in the state of Florida, we have [00:51:50] universal school vouchers and it's [00:51:51] radically increased the number of people [00:51:53] who are going to religious school [00:51:54] because it turns out the public schools [00:51:55] are not nearly as good in many cases as [00:51:56] the religious schools and parents would [00:51:58] prefer to opt out of schools that you [00:52:00] know are run by NEA principles that want [00:52:01] to trans the kids and not teach reading [00:52:03] and they would prefer to send their kids [00:52:04] to the local parochial school. That's a [00:52:06] really good thing. So I mean that that [00:52:07] would be like if I could pick one number [00:52:09] one thing to do, universal school [00:52:10] vouchers in every state would be the the [00:52:12] number one thing that I would do. That [00:52:13] is a very very quick beginning. Also [00:52:17] presumably, you know, you'd actually [00:52:18] want to talk about what sort of social [00:52:20] benefits are provided by a community [00:52:22] versus what social benefits are provided [00:52:23] at the federal level. I do think that [00:52:25] one of the things that's happened over [00:52:26] the course of the last 60 to 80 years in [00:52:28] American history is the substitution of [00:52:31] things like federal welfare benefits in [00:52:33] favor of the sort of earned benefits you [00:52:34] get in a community. So, in my local [00:52:36] Jewish community, which is very [00:52:37] tight-knit, if somebody loses their job, [00:52:39] everyone in the community immediately [00:52:40] leaps into action. We start a meal [00:52:42] train. We make sure everybody's fed. And [00:52:44] then we all start looking as fast as we [00:52:46] can for can we get a job for this [00:52:48] person. The beautiful thing about that [00:52:49] is that the person who lost the job [00:52:51] knows that everybody is working on their [00:52:52] behalf and they feel they owe it to the [00:52:54] community to actually go work. They [00:52:55] don't want to take the other person's [00:52:56] dime because they know them, right? That [00:52:58] person has a face and a family and [00:53:00] they're sacrificing for them. And that [00:53:02] ethos used to really prevail in the [00:53:03] United States. You can see it in the [00:53:04] movie Cinderella Man. You remember the [00:53:06] scene where Russell Crowe, right? He [00:53:07] actually takes welfare dollars and then [00:53:08] after he makes it big as a boxer, he [00:53:10] walks back to the welfare office and he [00:53:11] actually takes a wad and he puts it down [00:53:12] on the desk, right? Nobody would ever [00:53:14] think of doing that anymore because now [00:53:15] that's owed to us by the disembodied and [00:53:18] and faceless federal government. Well, [00:53:20] the people who are paying those taxes [00:53:22] have faces or haven't been born yet. [00:53:24] Okay? But in a local community, you know [00:53:26] that. So when the federal government [00:53:27] substituted itself for churches, people [00:53:29] dropped out of churches because the [00:53:30] economic benefit wasn't there. The [00:53:32] problem was a check doesn't cut it. [00:53:34] Okay? When the when you're part of a [00:53:35] local community, you do this. There's [00:53:37] also skin in the game. If you want to be [00:53:38] part of the community, you have to look [00:53:40] after my kids. You have to make sure [00:53:42] that you're living a particular [00:53:43] lifestyle. All of that is the stuff that [00:53:44] builds fabric of community and [00:53:46] government has crowded it out. [00:53:47] Thank you. [00:53:55] Hello, Mr. Shapiro. [00:53:57] Hello. [00:53:57] Um, first of all, I just want to say [00:53:58] that I love your work on astrophysics. I [00:54:01] assume that's what you do. I I really [00:54:02] haven't heard of you before this, but uh [00:54:04] I am the reincarnated soul of Albert [00:54:05] Einstein, and I was wondering what your [00:54:07] thoughts on reincarnation were. [00:54:10] Wow. [00:54:12] Uh, so first of all, I would hope that [00:54:15] you'd get to work, Albert, on something [00:54:16] more useful than being at a lecture and [00:54:17] asking my thoughts on reincarnation. [00:54:19] I actually have a new theory coming out. [00:54:20] It's, uh, the theory of relativity 2. [00:54:22] It's also known as a theory of rebirth, [00:54:24] also known as a theory of relatives. [00:54:25] It's all about reincarnation. I was [00:54:27] actually hoping you could get the word [00:54:28] out to Donald Trump that I have this [00:54:30] coming out and so he can help me, you [00:54:32] know, spread the word and get the [00:54:33] message out. [00:54:34] Uh, it it'll be first priority. [00:54:36] Fantastic. Uh my my thoughts on [00:54:39] reincarnation uh I I'm generally not a [00:54:42] believer in reincarnation. By the way, [00:54:43] even in Judaism, there are some theories [00:54:45] about reincarnation and all this kind of [00:54:46] stuff. It's just not my bag. Not not I'm [00:54:48] not big on it. I think you get one go [00:54:49] around and that's pretty much it. So, [00:54:50] you know, do your best. [00:54:52] Fantastic. Thank you. [00:54:53] Thanks. [00:55:00] Um hi Ben Shapiro. I'm Adele and thank [00:55:02] you so much for being here. And just a [00:55:04] question out of pure curiosity. So [00:55:06] according to you what is a woman? [00:55:08] What is a woman? A woman is a biological [00:55:11] human female which means a large zygote [00:55:13] producing part of the species. Okay. So [00:55:16] if you're actually going to define this [00:55:17] in technical biological terms then you [00:55:19] have small you know small u [00:55:23] fertility producing cells right you have [00:55:25] small small cell gametes which would be [00:55:27] sperm or you produce large large ova [00:55:31] right? You prod you produce eggs right? [00:55:32] You're either an egg producing part of [00:55:34] the species or you are a sperm producing [00:55:36] part of the species. This is what [00:55:37] typically defines not just in humans but [00:55:39] in literally all mamalian species the [00:55:41] difference between male and female. [00:55:43] Everything else is secondary. Okay. All [00:55:44] the secondary sexual characteristics are [00:55:46] secondary sexual characteristics. Now [00:55:48] that correlates almost all the time with [00:55:49] the SRY gene, right? Which is on which [00:55:52] is on one of the chro which is on all [00:55:53] the chromosomes actually, but it's it's [00:55:54] on the chromosomes. The SRY gene can [00:55:56] sometimes get crossed over and intersect [00:55:58] people, but that's the expression of of [00:56:00] the SRY gene is usually materialized in [00:56:02] whether you are a small or large [00:56:05] reproductive cell producing creature. [00:56:07] Uh, and that that is the technical [00:56:09] biological definition of female. But I [00:56:12] think that when you're teaching a [00:56:13] 2-year-old, the answer is, you know, [00:56:15] pretty obvious. [00:56:16] Um, just following up in psychology, we [00:56:19] learned that there's like biocschosocial [00:56:21] layers. So I'm curious how you would [00:56:22] define like the psychological level and [00:56:24] the social level. [00:56:25] Yes, that's so the [00:56:28] so what I mean by that [00:56:32] what I mean by that is that there are [00:56:33] characteristics that traditionally have [00:56:35] been associated with being a large large [00:56:37] reproductive cell producing creature or [00:56:39] a small reproductive cell producing [00:56:40] creature and those things are in fact [00:56:42] connected to the biology. But if you are [00:56:45] a member of these small reproductive [00:56:46] cell producing creatures and you have [00:56:48] characteristics like for example you the [00:56:50] of of the of the opposite right you're [00:56:52] you like wearing high heels but you [00:56:54] happen to be a small cell producing [00:56:56] creature you produce sperm that doesn't [00:56:58] make you a female it doesn't make you in [00:56:59] any way a female you're still a male [00:57:01] you're just acting like a lady because [00:57:03] you like putting on high heels and so [00:57:05] the the attempt to sort of cross over by [00:57:07] redefining female myths as a sort of a [00:57:10] category of behavior as opposed to a [00:57:12] biology is foolish. Now again there [00:57:15] there's a reason the stereotypes exist [00:57:16] which is they are connected to the [00:57:18] biology but if you disconnect them from [00:57:19] the biology the important aspect is [00:57:21] still the biology [00:57:23] right that that do you read what I'm [00:57:26] what I'm saying here [00:57:26] yeah right there [00:57:27] thank you for your time [00:57:28] what was that [00:57:29] oh just thank you for your answer [00:57:31] oh you bet [00:57:37] hey Mr. Shapiro, it's an honor to have [00:57:39] you here. Uh, so last week, like a lot [00:57:42] of us here, I was watching the election [00:57:45] and one of the things that surprised me [00:57:46] the most is they actually showed an exit [00:57:48] poll on the news of what people thought [00:57:52] was their most important issue. And only [00:57:54] about 3 4% in most cases said foreign [00:57:58] policy. And that surprised me a lot. And [00:58:01] I want to ask you, why do you think so [00:58:03] many voters don't value foreign policy [00:58:06] as one of our most important issues, [00:58:08] especially considering how [00:58:10] commander-in-chief is so often referred [00:58:12] to as the most important position the [00:58:14] president has and considering the [00:58:16] implications of the war in the Middle [00:58:17] East as well and the United States, [00:58:19] right? So, I I think that the the reason [00:58:20] that Americans don't pay attention to [00:58:22] foreign policy is because we're very [00:58:23] very lucky in our geography. If you live [00:58:25] anywhere else on Earth, foreign policy [00:58:26] is a top concern. In the United States, [00:58:28] you're not that concerned about foreign [00:58:29] policy because as Helm Manin said, God [00:58:31] blesses children idiots in the United [00:58:33] States of America. And what that means [00:58:35] that the United States is blessed with [00:58:36] the greatest geography of any country on [00:58:37] planet Earth. We are bordered by two [00:58:38] oceans, a bunch of Canadians and a bunch [00:58:40] of Mexicans. Okay, that means that we [00:58:42] live in legitimately like the most [00:58:44] peaceful area on planet Earth, which is [00:58:46] wonderful. It also means that we've [00:58:47] basically been free of history for quite [00:58:48] a while. If you go anywhere in Eastern [00:58:50] Europe, they're very much worried about [00:58:51] foreign policy because they border [00:58:52] Russia, for example. If you go to the [00:58:54] Middle East, foreign policy matters an [00:58:55] awful lot because the people who want to [00:58:57] kill you are sitting like right there. [00:58:59] So that that makes a huge difference in [00:59:00] terms of foreign policy. If you think of [00:59:02] border policy as foreign policy, which [00:59:04] really we should, then we are actually [00:59:05] quite concerned with with foreign [00:59:06] policy. You know, most countries their [00:59:08] foreign policy is their border policy. [00:59:09] So for the United States, the same is [00:59:11] true. Now the as far as kind of the [00:59:13] implications of foreign the truth is [00:59:15] Americans don't care about foreign [00:59:16] policy unless unless we lose, then it [00:59:20] matters an awful lot. Americans do not [00:59:23] like losing. They really don't. And take [00:59:25] a look at Joe Biden's approval ratings. [00:59:26] When he took office, he was in the high [00:59:28] 50s. And he kind of rode in the mid-50s, [00:59:30] low 50s for the first, you know, 8 [00:59:32] months. And then something happened. And [00:59:34] the thing that happened was the complete [00:59:35] debacle in Afghanistan. And it sunk him [00:59:37] into the low 40s. And he stayed there [00:59:38] literally the rest of his presidency. [00:59:39] Americans do not like the American flag [00:59:41] being shamed. They do not like American [00:59:43] soldiers being put in harm's way for no [00:59:45] reason. They do not like the American [00:59:46] flag being looked up down upon. They [00:59:48] like strength. They like winning. So [00:59:50] that means that we don't tend to think [00:59:51] about this stuff until something bad [00:59:53] happens, right? Which again I think is [00:59:55] is quite healthy for most Americans. [00:59:57] However, it does mean that when it comes [00:59:59] to foreign policy, actual leadership is [01:00:00] required because one of the problems [01:00:01] with foreign policy is that good foreign [01:00:03] policy looks difficult and hard. And [01:00:05] also good foreign policy is a series of [01:00:07] preventing counterfactuals. So to take a [01:00:09] perfect example, right? Right now [01:00:10] everybody, I think rightly so. If we all [01:00:13] had time machines, we'd go back and be [01:00:14] like, okay, no war in Iraq, right? Okay. [01:00:16] Okay. Well, the counterfactual is let's [01:00:17] say that there was let's say that the [01:00:19] war on terror happens and we create TSA [01:00:21] and we do war in Afghanistan. We do war [01:00:22] in Iraq and there are no major terror [01:00:24] attacks on American soil like 9/11 for [01:00:26] 20 years. Okay, that's the thing that we [01:00:28] saw, right? But what we didn't see is [01:00:30] what would have happened if we hadn't [01:00:31] done that. And there's no way to [01:00:32] actually identify that. So, one of the [01:00:34] easiest and I think dumbest arguments [01:00:35] about foreign policy is pretending that [01:00:37] there weren't trade-offs, right? Or that [01:00:39] a counterfactual never could have [01:00:40] happened. that because history went the [01:00:42] way that it did, if we had just changed [01:00:43] one of the key facts about it, it would [01:00:44] have kept going that way no matter what, [01:00:46] which I don't think is true, which means [01:00:48] that foreign policy takes leadership. [01:00:49] That's what makes it hard. [01:00:50] Thank you, Mr. Shapiro. [01:00:54] All right, this is the last question. [01:00:56] Thank you. [01:00:57] Good evening, Mr. Shapiro. Uh, I first [01:00:59] wanted to thank you for coming to [01:01:00] Vanderbilt and speaking to us. I first [01:01:02] would like to introduce myself. My name [01:01:04] is Sal Feldman. I'm from Miami, Florida. [01:01:06] I'm a member of the Vanderbilt College [01:01:08] Republicans and I'm also the Jewish [01:01:10] identity chair of Vanderbilt's only [01:01:11] Jewish fraternity, Alphaepsilon Pine. [01:01:13] And as an organization, we all work [01:01:15] together to spread awareness about [01:01:16] Israel and inform people about the [01:01:18] events that have recently happened, such [01:01:20] as creating a fundraiser that raised [01:01:21] hundreds of dollars. And I also [01:01:24] organized for brains with my rabbi [01:01:26] Schlomma Rafstein. Shout out to the [01:01:27] Vandy Kabad. As a way to get brothers to [01:01:29] relax and chat about Judaism. I for one [01:01:31] believe that Israel and Judaism are some [01:01:33] of the most important topics in the [01:01:35] world. And I personally feel that you [01:01:36] could potentially put your skills to an [01:01:39] even more amazing use than you already [01:01:41] do and could utilize them to a federal [01:01:43] and even an international level. My [01:01:45] question is, would you ever accept a [01:01:47] position on President Trump's cabinet or [01:01:50] would you ever consider running for [01:01:51] office whether it be in Congress or even [01:01:54] the White House in the future? I [01:01:55] personally feel that a lot of good can [01:01:57] come from that especially for the state [01:01:58] of Israel. You would have my vote. Also, [01:02:00] could I get a selfie after? [01:02:03] Um, I mean, I don't know what the rules [01:02:04] on selfies are. I'm perfectly willing to [01:02:06] do that. I don't know what the security [01:02:07] rules on selfies are. Uh, as far as [01:02:08] running as far as President Trump's [01:02:10] cabinet. Uh, I I have not been offered, [01:02:13] nor would I accept, if offered, a [01:02:15] position in President Trump's cabinet. [01:02:17] Uh, mainly because, again, that's not my [01:02:20] job. I think there are plenty of people [01:02:22] who are really great at doing these [01:02:23] sorts of jobs. I can't think of a [01:02:25] position in President Trump's cabinet [01:02:26] that I would be like the best at. [01:02:28] Frankly, I think that many of the picks [01:02:29] that he's made already, many, not [01:02:31] necessarily all, but I think many of the [01:02:32] picks, like a huge number of them are [01:02:34] really, really terrific. [01:02:35] I agree. [01:02:35] And and so, you know, like would I be [01:02:37] better seaf than Pete Hexath? Absolutely [01:02:39] not. Am I going to be a better sect [01:02:40] state than like Marco Rubio? I don't [01:02:41] think so. Am I going to be a better NSA [01:02:43] than Mike Wick? He's picking some [01:02:45] really, really good people. And so, I [01:02:46] think that the fact that we have a giant [01:02:47] audience that we've built up at Daily [01:02:49] Wire and people who listen to our stuff [01:02:50] on all sides of the aisle, I think is [01:02:52] really important work outside the [01:02:53] government. As far as ever running for [01:02:54] office, I mean, look, I think that the [01:02:56] the rule in the Constitution is now that [01:02:58] you have to be at least 78 years old to [01:02:59] run for president of the United States. [01:03:01] I'm currently 40, so I have 38 years to [01:03:03] think about it. [01:03:04] Jimmy Carter, 28. [01:03:05] I appreciate it. Thank you. [01:03:06] Thank you. [01:03:09] All righty. [01:03:18] Thank you so much. It's been a pleasure [01:03:19] to talk to you. Hope you have a [01:03:20] wonderful evening and of course make [01:03:22] America great again. [01:03:27] [Applause] [01:03:29] [Music]