Ep 279. - America first, Israel and the limits of white nationalism | Andrew Day
Welcome to back to Hats Off! The newest show from The Thinking Muslim, featuring Imam Tom. In todays episode we sit down with Imam Tom and Andrew day to discuss Judeo-Christian identity, Islam’s place in the West, The role of Israel in the US, and the deeper civilisational assumptions shaping American politics today.
Subscribe to Our Dubbing Channels:
Thinking Muslim Arabia: https://youtube.com/@thinkingmuslimarabic
Thinking Muslim Urdu:
https://youtube.com/@thinkingmuslimurdu
Thinking Muslim French: https://youtube.com/@thinkingmuslimfrancais
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7vXiAjVFnhNI3T9Gkw636a
Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-thinking-muslim/id1471798762
Sign up to Muhammad Jalal's newsletter: https://jalalayn.substack.com
Transcript - This is an automated transcript and may not reflect the actual conversation
Introduction
0:00
A lot of people who are critical of Israel are very critical of the idea of Judeo-Christianity later down on my list. Yeah, I want to talk about that. Either Islam is western or the west is
0:09
doesn't have a monopoly on that particular value. It does bring up this more philosophical question of what is characteristic and distinctive of of Western civilization at this point. Is it
0:17
Christianity? Is it something else? Obviously, this term is somewhat artificial. Like I'm sure
0:23
there was an Israeli push maybe during the time of Begin to kind of promote this idea in order
0:29
to appeal to American evangelicals to kind of emphasize this connection. These two groups,
0:34
Christians and Jews, have very tense relations. There is this foundational tension of of rejecting
0:41
Jesus. Maybe Muslims think that Christianity is ambiguously monotheistic because of the Trinity, but you know, Christians think of themselves as monotheists.
0:49
I would argue much more tense relations than Muslims versus Jews. So I think this might be something that's actually inside humans, you know, not not just inside nation states.
1:00
And if that's the case, I mean, I think we should be careful with with with diversity.
1:11
Welcome back. This is Hats Off, where we have real conversations across the aisle. We're going for something in between kumbaya that reduces or ignores downplays our differences. Uh but
1:20
then on the other end of the spectrum, we're not jubilee. We're not going for v virality or gotcha moments. It's not even about debate. It's about having substantial conversations with folks that
1:30
maybe we wouldn't always have the opportunity to to speak to uh with the hope and the belief that that will lead to a better world. And so today we have Andrew Day with us, senior editor of the
1:39
American Conservative. Welcome to Hats Off. Thanks for having me. I've been excited for this. Great. Yeah, I've been excited as well. Um, let's jump into it. The first thing I'd like to talk about,
Making Sense of Conservatism
1:47
and this we're recording this January 14th, so who knows what's going to happen immediately after
1:52
this interview, but we've seen several things that have resulted in some fractures on the right and
2:01
brought into question, let's say, the contested nature or soul of the MAGA movement. I think that
2:06
it's safe to say that MAGA has moved beyond Trump. Um, but then what is it really about?
2:12
um the recent twent 12-day war between Iran and Israel, then Venezuela, now Iran heating up once
2:20
again. Um we're left with a variety of actors and voices on the right calling for various degrees
2:25
of intervention or not intervention. Uh you wrote a recent article particularly on Venezuela where
2:31
you're describing a split how you characterize it between realists on one side and restrainers on the other side. Um, and the stakes that are involved seem to be what does a conservative
2:40
foreign policy look like in a multi-polar world? Um, what happened to America first? Is America
2:46
first dead? Was it ever isolationist? Uh, was it a misunderstanding of America first to think that it
2:52
it was mutually exclusive with interventionism? What's your what's your perspective? It's a big
2:57
question and an important question. I mean, you said that MAGA goes beyond Trump in some ways. I would say that MAGA or America first precedes Trump, right? And the American conservative
3:07
is in a good is a good example of that. We were co-founded by Pat Buchanan in 2002 in opposition to the war in Iraq. Pat Buchanan was an America first kind of guy. He was a politician,
3:17
presidential candidate, writer and he favored non-interventionism. But interestingly, if you look at his record during the cold war and if you look at people like him, Buchananite type
3:27
conservatives during the cold war, they weren't necessarily ideological restrainers. for example,
3:34
most prominently obviously in relation to the Soviet Union, they were probably a bit
3:39
more hawkish than the Democratic Party in that regard. So there wasn't necessarily this ideological anti-militarism at a like axiomatic level of this style of conservatism.
3:51
After the Cold War ended though, people like Papuchanan, America first type conservatives,
3:56
people who ultimately lost this conservative intraright battle to the neoconservatives. Um,
4:03
but the Papuchanans of the world were saying, "Okay, the Soviet Union has collapsed. We no longer need to be deeply involved in Europe because our main enemy of NATO has collapsed.
4:13
It doesn't exist anymore. We can see some sort of retrenchment that would be good for the United States going forward." They had similar ideas about the Middle East. You know,
4:22
the neoconservatives, they were still on this democracy promotion framework which came out of the cold war because that's how the Soviet Union and the US-led West were distinguished. You know,
4:31
we were the democratic world and we're defending democracy. After the Soviet Union collapsed, people like Pep Cannon didn't necessarily want to have this global crusade for a democracy, but the
4:40
neocons took that perspective to the Middle East. Right? So I think that what we're seeing now with
4:46
Trump is he's not the most ideologically consistent person, right? He relies a lot on instinct in many ways. He has revived this old right kind of paleoconservative Buchananite view,
4:58
but he's also kind of negotiating different factions. He has different instincts. I think on Venezuela there is some kind of America first case that can be made about like Western hemispheric
5:09
defense. Not that I'm supporting it. I just can see some sort of consistency there. On Iran,
5:14
in my view, that's a very different question. Like America, first people are opposed to war with Iran. That is not in the US interest. Mhm. Uh let's let's roll the clock back just a little bit.
5:22
I'm interested in your perspective since you're I think more obviously uh of a historian of the right than I am. What do you attribute um the success of the neocon movement or the triumph of
5:33
the neoconservative movement over the Buchananite conservative movement? Is there was it just inertia like sort of the the cold war policies that kind of like were e more easily continued
5:43
uh after via neoonservatism or was there something else? How do we make sense of who which one which
5:50
vision of conservatism kind of won out? Yeah, that's a very interesting question. I honestly that's not a question that I've posed to myself. Like I've thought a lot about this neocon versus
5:59
oldright kind of debate um that occurred during the cold war and afterwards. I mean, the splinter
6:06
became more salient and more obvious after the Cold War ended, as I said, and you know, I think
6:12
that maybe a lot of it can just be attributed to the successful jostling of the neoconservatives.
6:17
Like they were really good at what they did. A lot of these people were like extrasites. So, they had
6:22
this kind of inherent opposition to Stalinism. And then as they left that type of left-wing politics,
6:28
they gravitated to the Republican party as a more useful vehicle against the Soviet Union during the Cold War. And then when the Soviet Union collapsed, I think that they just retained the
6:37
energy somehow. Obviously, they they reached kind of the zenith of their influence during the George W. Bush administration. So, some of it maybe could just be attributed to their connections to the
6:48
kind of Bush faction of the Republican party. Um, inertia maybe is a is a good kind of guess uh for
6:55
why they won. Um, there is something about hawkism that allows you to kind of demonstrate your
7:02
strength to the voters. Even if the voters don't want hawkish policies, it makes you look like a tough guy. So, it's very appealing thing for a politician to gravitate to. I think that's part of
7:10
the story as well. And then, you know, there's the military-industrial complex. There's the Israel lobby. There are vested interests, right? Right. Who who wanted the neocons to win. Absolutely.
7:24
We are about 70 kilometers out of Campala to launch Beetle Mal hope special needs
7:29
center and we look forward to have many many special needs centers like this across Africa.
7:35
We have adometry rooms for boarding school and we have 10 classrooms will
7:42
provide education will provide training such as carpentry to increase the capacity of those
7:49
uh children with special needs. The center aims to be a regional hub and model for
7:55
future special needs care in Africa. But beyond the classroom is the power in uplifting every
8:01
member of our communities. Thank you for turning your compassion into hope.
8:14
Visit btml. us/thinking to learn more and give. Absolutely. So, let's put a pin in that cuz
8:21
I think that there's something interesting to explore there. I It literally just came through right now. It's not on my notes, but uh it would be interesting to explore that. And that was also
8:27
something that I've been doing some research on this past year. I was not aware previously as to the links to the old trigites and the left defectors that went on to uh influence the uh the
8:37
neoonservative movements such as David Haritz. I read his his memoir this past year. Um very
8:43
interesting stuff. Uh a lot of a lot needs to be probed about that. Um, you know, I'm temp tempted
8:48
to ask one more follow-up question, but I do like to move on because I like the fact that you put on the table several possible motivations and and we could say aligning interests that would allow
8:58
even even Trump like who I definitely agree is much more transactional than and instinctled than
9:05
ideological. But there are all these forces that are simultaneously at play. So even somebody who comes into power with a certain promise, well, it's not always necessarily the case that they
9:14
just well they lied and they had this agenda the whole time. It's as things continue to unfold, there's various, you know, push and pull factors that might drag one. And I think the the path is
Is Trump Covering for The Epstein Files?
9:24
pretty greased uh it's pretty greased to the hawkish uh language especially. Now a lot of
9:29
people Okay, last question on the last the last thing that um maybe regarding Trump in particular.
9:34
Um, a lot of people are saying that this is to cover for the Epstein files is that the timing of it is uncanny or at least one of the factors involved. Um, is that there's some compromising
9:44
or a lot of compromising information that's being held in the Epstein files and now this is sort of now taking attention. Do you see that as a major factor, a minor factor just happens
9:52
to be in the mix? Probably more the latter. I mean, my assumption about the Epstein files,
9:58
to the extent that we can use that nomenclature of like this discrete body of files called the Epstein Files, is that their full release, their full unredacted release would would include some
10:08
embarrassing information for Trump. I'm sure as a Playboy friend of Jeffrey Epstein in the 1980s,
10:14
he did some things uh had certain attitudes toward women that uh look quite misogynistic. Um,
10:22
but that stuff is not exactly surprising, right? I mean, we are all kind of aware of who Trump is. And I haven't actually seen evidence to justify the most like sensationalist version of the kind
10:32
of Epstein conspiracy, just in my opinion. So, I tend to think, you know, maybe Trump is clearly
10:38
frustrated with this whole Epstein thing. He wants people to move on from it. A lot of people in his orbit made a name for themselves, built up their reputation by calling for its release. So,
10:48
it's extremely awkward for the MAC movement. Um but I I don't really see the action in Venezuela
10:53
and this possible looming action in Iran as being certainly not primarily motivated by a desire to cover that up. Yeah. And he's teflon for a reason like whatever would come out it like what right
11:04
what would stick to him at this point. Um you know recently you tweeted that MAGA has been quote
11:10
co-opted and distorted from its original America first posture. Is this a relevant question? Who is
11:15
co-opting it and why? Well, I believe that tweet was me quote tweeting Lindsey Graham. Okay. Right.
11:22
And he is obviously a neoconservative Republican. The he's never heard of a war that he didn't want
11:29
to support or seen a country he didn't want to bomb. Um and he has become a big Trump backer.
11:34
I mean to some extent a lot of the Republicans have just because it's not a wise move to take on
11:39
Trump publicly. Trump has totally consolidated his power over the Republican party. And so Lindsey
11:45
Graham going along with Trumpism can be seen in that light, but also he clearly feels like he's getting a lot from Trump, right? Um, and now he's plainly freaking out about the possibility that
11:57
Trump actually won't bomb Iran. Trump clearly, you know, he set a red line. He said he will come to
12:03
the Iranians rescue if the uh Islamic Republic violently suppresses the protests that have
12:09
been going on since late December. Um, but now he appears to maybe be getting cold feet or trying to walk that back. I think his most recent statement was that uh the Iranian the Islamic Republic
12:20
has had stopped killing the protesters and they weren't planning on uh doing any executions. So
12:25
people like Lindsey Graham are are freaking out. And what I was reacting to there is that he used this phrase make Iran great again and we've been seeing this make Venezuela great again.
12:34
And I just struck me as the most obvious example of the fact that MAGA America first is being
12:40
co-opted when they're replacing the word America with a foreign country for the purpose of this in
12:45
this case it is a neocon war freeing the Iranians people in the Middle East spreading democracy that
12:51
is what neoonservatism purports to do. Yeah. No, definitely. I mean, I have some larger questions,
12:56
philosophical questions about about foreign policy, but this is a natural segue to talk about Zionism and the influence of Zionism, both on the individuals such as Linds Lindsey Graham,
13:06
uh, but also on the American political system in general, obviously, in the last two years, that's something that has come into laser focus for a lot of Americans. Stuff that if you were
13:15
maybe if you were part of the Muslim community or the Arab community, you were more aware of it earlier. Um, because we bear the brunt of a lot of the targeting that goes on. And I'm not sure
13:23
if you're familiar with BetAar. Betar was recently uh shut down in New York due to I mean it's it's
13:30
overdue like to be honest with you u with the the nature of their of their targeting of Muslims and
13:36
Arabs and Palestinians and also Jewish folks. Anybody who basically is against Israel first. One of the things that's the most disturbing to me and where when I talk to audiences because I I
Does Israel come before Free Speech?
13:45
get around I I tour the country and I I give talks and you know one of the most alarming things to me
13:51
is the potential to roll back free speech. And I think that free speech is one of these things that
13:56
as Americans we really have to rally behind to protect and that it's a very very slippery slope
14:02
if we start to compromise on it. Um I'm not sure if you saw the interview by Schlommo Kramer on
14:07
CNBC uh earlier this month. He's a Israeli cyber security billionaire, a tech CEO, and he said,
14:14
quote, "It's time to limit the first amendment in order to protect it." Uh, of course, you know, and
14:19
he's advocate advocating for government control over social media platforms. Uh, we've also seen a concerted effort. It's very very interesting. Whereas the the public-f facing discourse of
14:29
let's say various segments of the Muslim community and the Arab community trying to go for let's say more symbolic wins um either through encampments or through ceasefire um you know declarations or
14:41
things of this nature. The Zionists were kind of loading up on regulatory elements when it came
14:48
to how anti-semitism is considered. um title six enforcement campus free speech uh or or you know
14:56
limitations on free speech on campus. One of the big pushes is the IH definition of anti-semitism
15:02
which um through not through its explicit definition but through its illustrative examples conflates criticism of Israel with anti-semitism. Then I've seen on Tucker and on your platform as
15:12
well, you've got folks like Fishbach. You've got folks who recognize, you know, whether it's in Texas with Greg Abbott, whether it's Florida with Ronda Santis, whether it's, you know,
15:19
with Lindsey Graham, there seem to be a lot of American politicians who are very influenced, unduly influenced by um Israeli desires, whims, concerns, constitution be damned. How does this
15:31
set up the 2026 midterm elections on the right? How does it set up the the Republican party? Are
15:37
we looking at how how central of an idea is it? One thing that the Mandani, sorry I'm going on
15:43
here, but one of the things that I I reflected from the Mandani election in New York was this
15:48
tension between um keeping things at a symbolic register versus substance. The the interplay
15:55
between national and international issues versus local issues. And with these things, I'm not my
16:02
sense is that people don't want these elections to be a um um a mandate or a plebeite on on Israeli
16:10
influence, but they very they very well might become that uh if we keep going that way. Do you
16:16
see this as a central part of how 2026 is shaping up, at least in the primary scene on the right,
16:23
um and free speech in general? Where are we headed here? It's a good question. I'll say um
16:30
that Fishbach interview, the the person from the American Conservative who interviewed him actually has a very critical orientation towards Fishbach specifically on issues related to some things
16:39
Fishbach has said about Indian-Americans and so forth. Um although that particular interview
16:44
interviewer um is certainly very critical of Israel and the Israel lobby and obviously that's
16:50
kind of in the DNA of the American conservative to be critical of the Israel lobby. Um yeah, I mean
16:56
in recent years, you know, during the Gaza war, we saw an acceleration of a pre-existing trend which
17:03
was changing views of Americans of Israel, right? Israel was just it just became significantly less
17:09
popular than it used to be. A lot of Americans have been sort of reconsidering these issues, reconsidering the so-called special relationship with Israel. We're seeing that really in some ways
17:19
it looks more dramatic on the left just in the sense of a very low percentage of people in the
17:25
Democratic party and self-described liberals um say that they have a favorable view of Israel in
17:30
other ways this is a more striking development on the right um because I think you know one
17:36
widely cited uh poll I think it's Pew Research shows that 50% of Republicans under 50 have an
17:44
unfavorable view of Israel and I imagine if you looked at that in a more fine grained way at all of the various cohorts. The younger Republicans, the Zoomers, would have a strongly unfavorable
17:55
view of Israel. So, something has really changed here. The Gaza war contributed to that change.
18:00
It's a little different on the right than the left. I think the left is more motivated by like humanitarian concerns and obviously during the Gaza war, conservatives were as well. Um,
18:10
but but the emphasis on the right is different. It's really about American sovereignty. It's about having a foreign policy that serves the interests of the American people,
18:18
which is what America first means. And you know these these academ these like issues with free
18:24
speech on campuses. I have been paying attention to that less so in the last few months. But when the Makmoud Khalil thing happened, you know, the Colombia graduate student um who was arrested and
18:34
detained and faced deportation which ultimately was blocked. Um when that whole issue emerged
18:41
I wrote a column in the American conservative called Makmoud Khalil viewed from the right which actually got a lot of views. I think it's on like the Wikipedia page for Makmoud Khalil in which I
18:51
said okay you know under my preferred immigration laws he I guess wouldn't have been allowed into
18:58
the country in the first place because I favor restrictive immigration policy. I think you know Americans should be privileged in going to elite American universities. At the same time, you know,
19:08
he's not being targeted for for like normal conservative reasons. He's being targeted as a
19:15
a a critic of Israel, as someone who is protesting against Israel. And that raises serious problems,
19:21
I think, that conservatives, even anti-immigration conservatives, uh, should be concerned with,
19:27
independent of their views of what Makmoud Khalil was saying about Israel. And to my understanding, he wasn't actually a violent protester or something. He was misrepresented. Totally.
19:35
Absolutely. you know, he was very involved actually. He was heavily involved in in diplomacy. That was like kind of his his thing. Yeah. He was kind of acting as like a liazison
19:43
between Jewish students and Muslim students in the university, right? He doesn't he doesn't strike
19:48
me as being anti-semitic. Um although even that's kind of beside the point. I mean, you know, for me
19:53
it's like are you know who who is benefiting from from this policy? Who's driving it exactly? To me
19:59
it seemed obvious that it's like Miriam Adlesen. Yes. You know it's these pro-Israel donors. it's not the kind of the impetus behind it is not this America first conservatism and that's exactly I
20:09
think that's a great point um to to explore more because um who's benefiting from it and when how
20:15
can we differentiate when when bad faith actors are getting on a particular issue that a lot
20:20
of people might care about and you bring up immigration I did have some questions on im immigration later but since we're on the subject is there a concern that Israelis and Zionists are
20:30
exploiting um the the concern concerns that conservative Americans have about immigration
20:37
in order to get across certain pro-Israel policies or things of this nature. I mean, that's we see ICE and I again like I I had viewed your your discussion or debate rather
20:46
on on the ICE response in Minnesota, something that we could we could talk about later perhaps,
20:51
but but you know, one of the things missing from that conversation is the politicization, right,
20:56
of these issues that you can look at it from a philosophical angle. in a bubble. We're talking about well who should be let in and who shouldn't be let in and how should that look like and and
21:05
how have different political parties exploited let's say like refugee the refugee system or or various things. Those are those are they're not entirely philosophical. You know, they are
21:13
policy questions as well. But then there's a further dimension which is there are foreign powers that are trying to exploit these dynamics, right? In order to rile people up. Like I do not
21:21
believe for a second that some of the marches that have happened in Dearbornne or the social media influencers going around Minneapolis really care about immigration so much as they do are using
Anti-Immigration as a cover for Anti-Islamic Politics
21:33
it almost as uh as subtifuge to get to, you know, communicate anti-Islamic or anti-Muslim sentiment
21:39
or whatever they're trying to do. Sometimes it seems like direct uh agitation, right? uh on
21:45
these ways that is meant to stir back kind of an older politics kind of like a very like post 911
21:50
politics trying to resuscitate it. Um so I'd like I'd like your take on that but and I also like
21:56
your take on the future of America's relationship with Israel especially with what you're seeing on
22:01
the right like what is this something that Israel ever comes back from or is it over? Yeah. I mean,
22:08
I think the first thing that I would say is the Israel lobby in some ways is not totally unique,
22:15
right? Ethnic lobbies exist in the United States. Lobbies that clearly are advocating for the
22:21
interests of foreign nations exist in the United States. The Israel lobby has been quite good at it
22:27
politically. But if you think about, for example, this action in Venezuela, uh, the raid and the that led to the capture of Maduro, the general policy of like knocking down these left-wing
22:38
governments in Latin America, a lot of this has to do with this little Havana community in in Florida. They have a big powerful representative in the White House in the form of Marco Rubio. And
22:48
that's not so different from what we're talking about when we talk about the Israel lobby, right? Um, so it's not a totally unique thing. I think we should see it on that kind of register
22:58
like they're just playing the politics game um in a way that that's familiar, right? I do think
23:05
though on the right the fact that Trump has won on an America first platform has made this whole
23:10
conversation quite awkward, right? Because there's just a clear contradiction. Like why should there
23:16
be this special relationship with Israel that the United States has? You know, isn't it the case?
23:21
People have been asking that a lot of America's foreign policies over the past 25 years or so,
23:27
they haven't really benefited America and they weren't maybe even intended primarily to benefit the United States. Um, it looks to a lot of people like our foreign policy in the Middle East was in
23:38
many ways trying to benefit Israel. I think that's a somewhat complicated subject because I do think strategic planners in the United States sometimes think of Israel as like an attack dog, you know.
23:47
Um, but for the most part, I do think like this Iran stuff is clearly driven by Israeli interests,
23:55
right? Mhm. So, going forward, this is going to be difficult because it it's now come to be the case
24:02
that the right has the loudest pro-Israel voices and the loudest anti-Israel voices. And this
24:08
makes for a very awkward coalition. I don't think that these are the issues that the ordinary voter
24:14
prioritizes at the ballot box. Foreign policy generally, it's probably a bit more significant
24:20
than a lot of political analysts realize, but for the most part, Americans are thinking about like pocketbook concerns, you know, um inflation, immigration as well. So, I think there's going
24:30
to have to be some kind of motus with that the various factions of the Republican party come to.
24:35
I really see JD Vance as a very plausible person to lead the Republican party forward on this
24:42
particular point, right? He actually is not like an anti-Israel guy. You know, he's associated with
24:48
foreign policy restraint, but he's always kind of carved out an exception for Israel. You can watch his speech that he gave at an event co-hosted by the Quincy Institute in the American Conservative
24:57
in which he explains his support for Israel. He's somewhat changed his tune on that. Now his
25:03
perspective is more, you know, when American and Israeli interests are aligned, when they overlap,
25:09
um, then, you know, we can cooperate with Israel. When they diverge, then we'll go do our own thing and they'll go do their own thing. And I think that has to be the perspective going
25:19
forward. And I think Israel is preparing for this. Like Benjamin Netanyahu clearly seems to recognize that they're they're running out of like runway. Like eventually American support, at least
25:29
unconditional, lavish American support is going to be over. They need to detox. Yeah, I think that's why they're kind of accelerating now to be honest in terms of their That's the thing. I mean
25:38
there's there's a viability question. Um because Netzanyahu has also said over the many decades
25:43
in which he's been in power that you know, Israel cannot survive without the United States support. So how much of it is a bluff or a ploy? Like that's the thing. I don't I don't I don't see how
25:52
Israel can exist honestly without the U. I know that that Matt Walsh has made similar comments and Tucker has made similar comments to this as well. I don't see because here's where I I disagree
26:03
that I mean I I get what you're what you're you're saying in that in in some sense. Yes, there's always ethnic groups that are lobbying for their own interests. Of course, that's you know
26:11
a protected activity. I don't know of any other group that does what Israel does though or their
26:17
lobby uh in the gangsterish way in which they move in the way in which they commit assassinations
26:22
across the world in the way in which they flout local laws and they call actively and out loud
26:29
for constitutional amendments to be uh curtailed or freedoms to be curtailed. I don't know of any
26:35
other um group that has I'm not sure if you're if you've delved deep into the history of anti-terror
26:42
law in the United States that anti-terror law was very much formulated in conjunction with Israel
26:48
pretty much to target the PLO and the PLA from the beginning from 1969 the first time that terrorism became uh a thing a legal category on uh federal statutory law. Um the first act in the immigration
27:01
act of of 1969 was was prohibiting Palestinians from receiving UN aid if they had received
27:09
uh military training. Right? So from 1969 onwards, right, this idea of terrorism, which people
Ambiguity behind the meaning of Terrorism
27:15
complain and it's a it's a it's their intuition is correct when they complain about the the
27:21
incoherent nature of this legal term that we call terrorism. You know, one of the things, you know, as you pointed out with the ICE conversation, um the government saying that the um you know,
27:32
um Miss Good was involved in domestic terrorism. We we don't really have a definition for what that actually means. Uh not certainly a definition that would include everything that we want to include
27:41
and exclude everything that we want to exclude. And the same is true when it comes to to foreign policy as well. that and many legal scholars have written, you know, articles on this in in law
27:50
journals that, you know, the the the the ambiguity of the definition of terrorism makes it into a
27:57
foreign policy tool rather than something that is actually protecting American lives. And that
28:02
is something that is, I think, what the history that I know is somewhat deliberate. It's somewhat deliberate because it is meant to crush solidarity with Palestine internationally um by choking off
28:12
all the points of potential financial support to uh Palestinian civil society. Um of course,
28:18
sure, nobody wants money to go to radical groups. Okay, no problem. But when you're talking about
28:23
migrating that law over in the '90s like it did to now you can't even raise money for humanitarian concerns because now everything is just labeled terrorism. Well, everybody's a terrorist now. like
28:33
how can we this this is a runaway justification for things. I don't know of any lobby or any
28:38
ethnic group that has gone to such extents and you know not being reigned in by far enforcement and
28:45
all of these types of things. So I I would argue that that the Israeli influence is unique maybe
28:52
not in not categorically or in kind but definitely in degree. Um and I'm not sure you know how how
29:00
things move forward. I don't see a future. I think that that's why there's so much escalation and almost so much um it doesn't even seem extremely well thought out at this point. you know, they're
29:10
bragging, right, when Netanyahu has meetings with social media influencers and tells them, you know,
29:17
we're going to pay you to and we're going to we're striking deals with with uh Elon Musk, we're striking deals like to adjust the algorithm for Grock and adjust the AI and you know, they're
29:27
very very the Ellison takeovers of of the various media outlets. Like it's all very in-your-face.
29:34
Um, and I think that if they felt more secure, I think that things would be a lot less fever pitch
29:41
and and and less apparent than they currently are. Not sure your your your take about that. I don't want to dwell on it too long. I know there's a lot else to talk about, but um well,
The Israeli Influence
29:50
I would like to respond. Sure, please. Yeah, I think some distinctions have to be made if you're talking about assassinations. Yeah. You know, Israeli intelligence services are kind of famous
29:58
for having heavy hand and being willing to use uh, you know, astonishing forms of violence and
30:04
covert actions overseas. Um, that's true. I don't think that could be attributed to the ethnic lobby
30:10
per se in the United States. And your last point, you said that if they felt more secure, you know,
30:16
we would be seeing things unfolding differently. You know, I think there's a lot of wisdom to that,
30:22
right? So just again making distinctions between like Israel and the American Jewish community and
30:27
the Jewish diaspora and then Americans in general. um you know in Israel it's definitely a society
30:33
that feels besieged right they feel like a tiny little country 9.5 million people or whatever it
30:41
is um surrounded by larger Arab and also Persian uh nations right and I think that Netanyahu in
30:49
particular probably inherited from his father has this general view and a lot of people in Israel
30:55
have this general view that anti-semitism is kind of this universal constant and it and it can't be
31:01
affected by the actions of of Israel. It's just going to be there and they have to deal with it. They have to have a more aggressive, bolder foreign policy. They have to seize the strategic
31:11
initiative uh because that's not going to go away. So, they just have to like kill, you know,
31:16
defeat their enemies, right? And I think I don't know how we get past that in Israel because that
31:24
is a widely held view. you know, Netanyahu is not like on the far end of the nationalist spectrum or
31:31
something like he maybe he's unpopular for various reasons. Um, but most Israelis, you know, if they
31:38
if they oppose the war in Gaza, it's because they wanted to get the hostages back. It's not necessarily for reasons that like the left here in America opposes it. And then over here in America,
31:47
I think it's worth noting that even though for most Jewish Americans, Israel does have a certain
31:52
significance. There's a divide emerging between like Israelis and Jewish Americans, especially
31:57
younger Jewish Americans. They just don't really see things the same way as the Israelis do, and that'll be interesting to watch going forward. In many cases, they were the people leading these
32:06
college campus events against the Gaza war, right? Yes. Absolutely. No, those are very important distinctions to to make and that's why I think strong FAR enforcement is essential actually in
32:16
order to help those distinctions remain clear. Um because sometimes unfortunately with groups like Betar like for example um it seems like the lines get deliberately smudged. Um so it's difficult to
32:26
tell who's acting on behalf of a foreign power and who's acting as an American. And obviously there's lots of conversations about dual loyalties and things of that nature. Um and dual citizenship
32:37
and and other things, dual citizenship and government, right? And I know Tucker has a very hot take on that. Um, but you know, your your your point brings is is very interesting and I
32:47
agree that there is something I mean, I'm going to put it a bit more provocatively that there's some there seems to be something in the DNA of uh the Israeli government as constructed um to uh to
Paranoia within The Israeli Government
33:00
almost this this paranoia. Um, I'm not hiding my opinions whatsoever. I think that paranoia comes
33:06
from the original sin of the way in which the state was founded. I think that the nekba and the ethnic cleansing and the the hagana and the ergun and and the types of things that happened
33:15
um I think that that results in a paranoia that like France Fenon wrote about right when you commit massacres and you kind of know that you did wrong there there sets in a paranoia I believe
33:24
that's like a moral universal within within the world not to say that you know that of course
33:30
when when any type of conflict happens there can be you know various types of blame on on other
33:36
side on multiple parties and multiple sides But I think that there's a founding element that is
33:42
strikes me as as acutely unjust. And this brings uh a question like should Israel as a government,
33:50
we're talking about the government, not people, but should the government as a professed Jewish
33:55
state, which in my understanding means a Jewish supremacist state. Maybe I'm misinformed about
34:02
that, but I don't see how that could not result in a parttheid should that type of government exist. So, well, first let me say I'm I'm more interested in America than in Israel. And and you know,
34:12
as I said earlier, a right-winger has kind of a different view on this uh than a leftwinger who is critical of Israel and the USIsrael relationship. The question like should Israel exist as a Jewish
34:22
state? That's kind of a question that's posed on like a moral plane, right? Like, and I usually
34:27
don't analyze politics on that plane per se. What what I would say about Israel is it does exist,
34:34
right? it seems to not be going anywhere. And the question is how do we go forward in a way
34:39
where this can be a more stable situation in the Middle East and and I don't necessarily I mean I take your point about the Nakba um certainly you know that created a trauma with Palestinians that
34:50
would be difficult to overcome. Um like there's always going to be a division and a tension there.
34:56
But I don't know if these things were quite as predetermined that early. Like if you think about for example like the you might have heard of like the clean break memo. Um this is become a
35:07
more notorious and and uh well-known memo. It was written I believe in 1996 for the incoming at the
35:14
time prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. That's how long he's been around. You know u he hasn't been
35:19
continuously prime minister the whole time but that's when he was coming in as prime minister initially. And that memo was actually written by some American uh neoonservatives who would go on
35:28
to u to to staff the Bush administration. And they argued that Israel was needed to be tougher. It
35:37
needed to seize the strategic initiative. It can no longer be in this like land for peace framework where it was trying to ac come to some sort of accommodation with the uh Arab world. Um
35:48
it needed to just defeat its enemies and take a much more aggressive approach. It also needed to emphasize Western values in order to get the US to go along with this. And I would say that in some
35:59
ways it's kind of worked for Israel. Sometimes it seems like they're kicking ass. You know, I'm sure that's how they feel when they look at how they've degraded Hisbala and etc. In other ways,
36:07
I think this is very unstable. Yes. I I I think in terms of Israel's long-term interests like
36:14
you we're facing a situation where the US western support for Israel is going to decline because of
36:20
changing public opinion in America and then Israel because of its kind of bicosity in the Middle East
36:26
over the past long time but accelerating in recent years it's it's really freaking out its neighbors.
36:34
we're seeing some signs of a kind of alliance of Muslim powers against it. Um and and you can
36:43
imagine that those things in combination could lead to a bad very unstable situation say in 20 years or so. And I think the US should be mindful of that. And like I'm always in like I'm always
36:54
trying to look for diplomatic opportunities. And I don't know if this kind of original sin
36:59
narrative is necessarily uh helpful in that regard because if you start telling the Israelis, oh,
37:07
you need to give up your state as like a Jewish state, are they going to do it? Are you ever
37:12
going to persuade them to do that? It seems quite unlikely. Yeah. Right. Yeah. Yeah. Fair enough. I mean I I I find it very interesting. So So one of the questions I had pocketed that I w wanted
Where is God in Foreign Policy
37:21
to ask earlier. Um you know when you say that you're you're usually not concerned about like
37:26
what should or shouldn't happen. We're talking about politics. It's it seems like a more realist conception of politics. One of the things I wonder about conservatism in general, um, especially
37:37
with the the differing maybe factions, competing factions you could say, or the contested nature
37:43
of it that recent things are highlighting such as Venezuela and Iran. Where is God in all this?
37:51
Where is faith? How does it come into the picture when we're thinking about foreign policy? Is it
37:57
really just can we? And this is a very open-ended question. I don't have any thought this through
38:03
but can we call ourselves um people of faith with such I would even say materialist you know in in a
38:14
realist understanding of of politics that doesn't involve a moral lens of what should be or I'm not
38:22
sure I I have a lot of I have a lot of questions more questions than answers on that but I but I feel like I would I would throw it to you to get your thoughts. Yeah, it's interesting. You know,
38:30
one way that you can tell that we've moved into a kind of post-liberal world where we've seen a
38:37
return of the political is that questions, religious and spiritual questions are kind
38:43
of coming to the four again like and you can think about I don't think I don't think as on this deep
38:49
of a level usually like I'm in journalism and I'm following the day-to-day and I so it's nice to have an opportunity to look past the headline headlines but you could think about religious and
38:58
spiritual ual questions definitionally as kind of questions of ultimate meaning. Mhm. And it's interesting that we're seeing more mention of them now like there's this debate about whether
39:08
Judeo-Christianity is a category that we later down on my list. Yeah. I want to talk about that. You're seeing kind of biblical interpretations right in the context of of Israel. And in some
39:18
ways America is um kind of unique among Western countries and having maintained a certain religiosity level of religiosity right certainly from Europe. Yeah. But in other ways, you know,
39:30
liberalism tries to bracket these questions. It doesn't want to engage in these questions of
39:36
ultimate significance in part because it doesn't think that that matters for citizenship, for the relationship between citizens and the government. And it doesn't think that the government should
39:45
enforce any kind of grand religious conception on the people. You know, this is part of freedom of
39:50
religion. It has deep roots in the western kind of political tradition. Um but I don't think that you can bracket those questions indefinitely right and what we're you know I take a kind of nichian
40:00
perspective I think on these issues in the sense that I think that the western world if you don't
40:06
mind me using that category it's it's in this postChristian phase and one thing that people
40:12
are realizing is you can't just really pluck God from uh the the the Christian vision and just
40:19
leave liberalism or something. They can't just evolve into this kind of atheistic philosophy without inducing this real kind of unwe in the in the population. People feel lost. They don't feel
40:29
like they understand their place in the cosmos anymore. It it it really severs our connections
40:36
and people turn to drugs and materialism as you were kind of alluding to earlier. And so I do
40:41
think that this is a major thing that needs to be addressed. And also just on a practical level like
40:46
the decline of church attendance, it's usually just used as a proxy for declining religiosity.
40:51
It it has real tangible negative consequences. The churches in America were historically a kind of
40:58
venue for like feeding the poor, for example, housing the homeless, right? Um providing a
41:04
sense of community and kind of moral order um that was communally enforced. And I think the
41:10
loss of that is is a tremendous one for the western world. You're the thinking Muslim.
41:36
thinking.
41:42
I've got some really exciting news for you. My guests and I now speak udu, Arabic, and French
41:47
with the help of AI, of course. We aim to reach a larger audience and hope to dub our archive and
41:53
new programs into these languages. I need you to subscribe to these channels and help spread the
42:00
word. If you want to help this project, please consider making a donation or becoming a member.
42:09
Yeah, I agree. And I think um one of the things that appealed to me um about Islam was there was
42:17
almost a a sense that those questions should never be bracketed, right, in the way that liberalism does. that even if you're talking about politics, you're talking about economy,
42:27
um the moral dimension of of what should be what does God expect of you, right? It can't really
42:33
be shut out of the room. It doesn't necessarily it doesn't necessitate a totalitarian politics where now it's like, well, we have to enforce this particular like that. I see that as a political
42:41
question, one that's relevant to people of faith as relevant as it is to people uh who aren't
42:47
people of faith about, you know, what's the um how do you deal with difference? you know, how do you
42:52
allow a marketplace for ideas? How do you allow people to persuade one another? And how how far
42:59
are you well are you willing to allow people to persuade? Right? And that that gets into a larger question I did want to ask you about um picking my my my uh questions here. Which one I want to
The Core of Western Civilisation
43:09
get to first? Um what is the core? What's the core of of Western civilization? How do we define it?
43:16
you know, um, you know, Tucker has has settled on a particular notion of moral individualism, um,
43:26
which, um, I think is profound, but I also think he's he's missing something large, which is that
43:34
that's not exclusive to the West. He he posits it as something that's exclusive to the West. It's also a very Islamic uh value ironically that the idea that there is no collective blame nor
43:44
collective punishment that every soul shall not bear anything for somebody else. In fact, that's
43:51
actually part of why um Islamic theology rejects the idea of the vicarious atonement because we
43:56
believe because of the moral individuals we believe every single person will be held to account as an individual as in the Quran. So um if it's not western if that's actually a larger value
44:10
that that um that does exist in other places either either Islam is western or the west is
44:16
doesn't have a monopoly on that particular value. It does bring up this more philosophical question of what what is fundamental what is essential what is characteristic and distinctive of of western
44:26
civilization at this point. Is it Christianity? Is it something else? I'm not sure your thoughts on that. I think it's usually difficult to answer these kinds of questions in that way
44:36
like what is the essence of this particular nation or this particular group. Mhm. Um, often times there's no core or essence. There's just kind of family similarities, right? And I,
44:47
if I was answering the question of what the West is, and we're talking about Western civilization, sometimes in foreign policy writing, you'll hear about the West as a kind of security arrangement
44:56
that includes like Japan for example. But if we're talking about Western civilization, you know, I think I think that in some ways it's obvious that America is part of it. Like we're in DC now.
45:09
You can tell even in the architecture this kind of Greco Roman and you know antiquity inspiration
45:14
for American political architecture that the the design of our constitution was heavily informed by
45:20
the tradition of western political philosophy going back to like Roman antiquity right if
45:26
you look at the history of western political thought the Europeans were all kind of there was so much cross-pollination um to the point where you know we think of for example Thomas
45:34
Hobbes is an English political philosopher but he was like living in France and influenced by Italians, you know. Um, so there's definitely some distinctive cultural grouping and that's what
45:44
a civilization is. It's like a the largest cultural grouping of which you are a part
45:49
um called the West that includes North America and Europe. I mean, we were talking about how
45:56
liberalism likes to bracket religious questions. It also likes to bracket race. But I think part of
46:01
this, however awkward that might be for people to consider, where the west is kind of like one half
46:08
of the white world. It's like the nonRussian white people, right? That's one way to look at it. And
46:14
um and America and and Canada and Australia were European in that sense. You know,
46:20
they were kind of offshoots, colonial offshoots of Europe. Um not victims of colonial domination,
46:26
but you know, I mean, that's it. In some ways, yes, they were. But uh but you get my point. It's something different than that. They weren't like an external people that were colonized. They
46:34
were themselves European who went away from the continent. And then one reason this has become
46:39
kind of confusing is because over time, you know, in the last few decades, there has been a very rapid demographic transformation of the western world. It's one way that you can tell that
46:48
the western civilization is a coherent entity is they're all kind of facing the same thing, right? across Europe in the United States, Canada, Australia, they're all experiencing simultaneously
46:59
something that's kind of unprecedented like the sort of voluntary demographic transformation of their countries. I mean, that's made this whole issue even more fraught to think about and I think
47:09
that's why people turn to this kind of abstraction like the west is about liberalism, you know, or the west is about uh individualism as apparently Tucker Carlson says and I agree that that's just
47:19
not going to cut it. Like if I was thinking about what is western civilization, you know, it's not totally delineated from others, there's like a one of the things that's interesting about Western
47:28
civilization is it's kind of interested in the world, you know. Right. Yeah. Yeah, I was going to say one example of that is actually the uh the cross-pollination between Muslim peoples and Islam
47:36
and Western civilization like when it comes to a lot of the early um throughout the Renaissance
47:42
and the early and the early enlightenment you know folks like Francis Bacon being influenced and using actually like you know Muslim produced manuals um science and other things as well even
47:53
politically you know a lot of people don't so I co-wrote an Islamic history book this year called um Islam in world history through rutledge and one of the things that people don't know is that
48:02
um you know the Protestant revolution across Europe um they they enlisted the help of the
48:07
Ottoman Empire as a hedge against the Catholics because they were they were afraid of of you know being kind of brought back in. So whether it's Queen Elizabeth uh in England but also
48:17
the German states and also then uh Eastern Europe in Romania today's Romania and Hungary
48:22
um you know it brings up a larger question of history versus memory and the curation of that
48:28
history because whereas people like Gibbon will write that history as oh you know uh the Islam
48:35
was defeated at Vienna and it's like well the Protestants also called some of their Protestant
48:40
groups that invited the Ottomans to come to Vienna because they were afraid of the Hobsburg they were afraid of of being pulled back into a type of um you know forced into Catholic belief in
48:50
that particular case. So you know there's there's there's issues of delineation. Sure. Uh for sure
48:56
there's also issues of curation I think as well which is that whenever we're going to present
49:03
perhaps it's project present and project onto the the the present moment um something that's rooted
Selective memory in Judeo-Christian Values
49:09
in the past we're we're we're selecting by by nature. We go to the Greeks, we're keeping,
49:14
we're choosing to select the architecture and the philosophy. We're ditching the oracles and the the polytheism and the paganism. We skip over the Ostrogoths and the Visigothths. We we strip we
49:24
we there are selections, editorial decisions that are made. And that brings us to the question of Judeo-Christian values because is it a thing? Is there is there something that it it seems to me,
49:37
you know, knowing history as I know it, it almost seems like an oxymoron, especially for people who are extremely dedicated to to Christianity, let's say like God first conservatives. Um,
49:50
that these two groups, Christians and Jews, have very tense relations, very tense relations
49:56
over their histories. I would argue much more tense relations than Muslims versus Jews. Um,
50:02
and yet within the last 150 years, there's become this construct or this this curation of this idea
50:08
of of Judeo-Christian values. I don't really believe in it. I don't really see it as having
50:13
much of a tangible reality outside of what people have imagined it to be. It's almost like an an empty symbol that they can kind of load a lot of things into. Certainly, I don't believe
50:21
Isra Israel is a democratic society. I don't see Israel as representing Western values, even the
50:26
ones that we that we hope to champion. If we if we hope that western civilization is demarcated
50:32
by a certain you know freedom of thought and um again marketplace of ideas persuasion these types
50:38
of things you can't do that in Israel like you know there's roads for Palestinians there's roads for Israelis like it is an apartheid society like top to bottom um so I I I question this
50:49
thing let alone then going back to some of the more provocative things like the you know the Nick Fentes of the world say about about you know there is this foundational tension of of rejecting
51:00
Jesus. And that to me just throws into such stark relief the the political and constructed nature of
51:08
some of these these concepts that Muslims who um accept and revere Jesus as the Messiah. Um seen in
51:17
a Huntingtonesque way as the civilizational other of the West. And then other folks who reject the
51:27
um you know the the the morality of of Jesus entirely, right? Um as being seen as
51:34
civilizationally closer. As you could argue, you know, Ashkenazi through Europe and you know, maybe there's some cultural things, but it just for me it throws into relief like the very very political
51:44
and and constructed nature of these terms. And my ultimate what I what I'm driving at here is that
51:53
the concern for me is that this holds us back. Is that we need rather than comforting symbols,
52:00
we need to drill down on exactly what are the values that we believe make us us. Uh in order to
52:05
be able to accurately register when those values are under threat um and how to protect them in
52:12
a robust way. And that's my fear. My fear is that and I I I'd like to hear your your opinion on this
Tension between The Ethnic and The Morale Self
52:18
point specifically. I wonder if there's a tension between the ethnic or racial, however we want to
52:26
characterize it, dynamics of the identity of of Western civilization versus the moral and the
52:32
values-based ones. I wonder if there's a tension there. The historian in me says that there has
52:37
to be because even ethnicities are fluid. You know when Gibbali united Italy in 1861 he said
52:45
okay well we have Italy we need to make Italians now that these things do not they have they have
52:51
genesis ethnogenesis right these groups they form and then they dissolve and they they do get mixed
52:57
over time with recognition that some of the ways in which that's happened within the last you know 70 years or so have been like quite artificial or accelerated or or you know um maybe unprecedented
53:06
in in in in certain ways but in general yes ethnicity ities do come and go. They do start
53:12
and stop. They do meld into other things there. That's why there's old English, middle English, late English. That's why, you know, the idea of England for the English when before before the
53:23
Saxons came, before the Romans came, like you know that there is a certain degree of flexibility that
53:31
happens and change that happens. And I wonder if there's an inherent tension between those
53:36
two dynamics. If you we had to choose let's let's put it provocatively if we had to choose between a
53:42
future 2070 America 2070 where we have a certain regime of values we have to choose between a
53:51
regime of values or an ethnic or a racial identity which one wins and how does that happen? It's a
53:58
good question. I have a lot I mean you said a lot and I'm going to try to respond to everything I said. I mean when you were talking about curation and historical memory I found that interesting.
54:07
um and forgetting is part of the historical process. I don't think that fact necessarily lends
54:14
itself to kind of deconstructionist orientation towards you know some sort of group that has participated in historical forgetting. I mean I think this forgetting can be a source of like
54:23
creative creativity even in your personal life. Like if you think about your biography in terms
54:28
of like all of the mistakes you made and all the horrible forgetting is a mercy. Yeah. Forgetting is a mercy. Yeah. You you would be a mess. you know, you have to remember, you have to kind of
54:36
selectively remember things in order to just get on with life. Um, and I think the same applies to,
54:42
you know, national histories, you know, histories of groups. Um, Judeo-Christianity is another
54:48
thing that you brought up. I think this is an interesting topic. I haven't really explored the
54:53
I know that there's a debate going on on the right or some corners of the online right at least about this. It seems to me that a lot of people who are critical of Israel are very critical of the
55:01
idea of Judeo-Christianity. Obviously this term is somewhat artificial like um you know people
55:09
weren't using this term more like a hundred years ago as I understand I don't think the US founders thought of themselves as you know subscribing to Judeo-Christianity. I'm sure there was an Israeli
55:20
push maybe during the time of kind of promote this idea in order to appeal to American evangelicals
55:27
to kind of emphasize this connection. Um, again I see that as a sort of normal geopolitical process.
55:34
I mean you mentioned the Ottomans. The same thing's happening with Turkey now. Europe kind of changes their orientation toward Turkey depending on geopolitical considerations, right? Oh yeah,
55:44
you are European actually because we kind of need the second biggest army in NATO on our side at the moment. Um, as far as what I think about the the validity of this concept of Judeo-Christianity,
55:56
I would point out, I mean, yes, in some ways from a Christian perspective, in some ways you
56:02
could see a lot a big strain of anti-semitism is kind of arising from Christian theology because the Jews become figured as like the people who rejected Christ, right? But in another sense,
56:12
if we think about the rise of Christianity, it was in its origins, Christianity was a Jewish sect.
56:18
Jesus was a Jewish rabbi with Jewish disciples and you know in its early years it remained that way.
56:26
Maybe it was perceived to be a kind of heretical sect uh from the standpoint of you know the Jewish priests. Uh but nevertheless it was definitely within that context that that Christianity
56:36
arose as a kind of new Jewish sect and then it became the dominant religion in Rome. Right?
56:45
It was very popular Christianity among women in Rome. It actually wasn't in its origins during
56:50
its rise the kind of uh philosophy of the uh the the downtrodden. You know what I mean? You know
56:57
the pagans, you know, paganism is a complicated term because they didn't it's not like all the
57:04
Europeans at the time called themselves pagans. They just had these ethnic ancestral religions, right? Polytheistic religions. They saw nature itself as sacred. And Christianity rose in Rome
57:14
and became the official religion. And the pagans were the people on the outskirts who who held on to their ancestral religions, right? And then Christianity spread. I'm sure it had some kind of
57:24
appeal to Europeans because it sort of resonates with their with their views of God prior to to
57:32
monotheism. Like Jesus is like the God man, you know? So, I'm sure that appealed to them. he was
57:39
kind of presented in a way that would especially appeal to like the Germanic uh tribes. But I
57:45
do think it's I think that origin is important because I think you can see that there is a kind of ethical and metaphysical core of Christianity that is Jewish. Like metaphysically it's
57:58
monotheistic. I know maybe maybe Muslims think that Christianity is ambiguously monotheistic
58:03
because of the trinity but you know Christians think of themselves as monotheists. Um, and that
58:10
was new because Christian or because Europeans prior to Christianity were polytheistic. And
58:15
this is a totally different spiritual orientation because all of a sudden God is the thing beyond nature that created nature. So nature is no longer sacred. So it has this metaphysical significance.
58:25
It also has a, you know, the ethical core of of Christianity I think is Jewish because it puts the
58:31
the focus on like the weak protecting the weak. This was not a pagan ideal, right? Famously, you
58:36
know. So I do I don't think it's okay. Maybe it had this kind of political veilance. Maybe it was
58:42
artificial in that sense. It's new. It's promoted in order to make Americans more supportive of
58:48
Israel. But it it kind of makes sense to me and it explains, I think, why a lot of Christians are
58:56
so inclined to support Israel. They do feel this kind of organic connection to it even if they have
59:02
a lot of people trying to persuade them as well. Mhm. That's why the persuasion works, right? You know, but on the same count, like both of the things that you mentioned also exist in Islam,
59:11
like monotheism and then Well, yeah. I mean, it's part of this whole thing like I mean it's like the
59:18
the story in Iran would be that it was Zoroastrian until Islam, right? You could tell a similar story
59:23
to the one that I just told. I don't know exactly. I mean, it's not a polytheistic religion. It's like kind of mannequin or something. Um, so it would like look different. Um, but I mean Islam
59:34
is part of this conversation, right? The Abrahamic monotheistic religions like they kind of come from the same place. Yeah. You know. No, you recognize that. I don't think that the average American
The Average Americans understanding Ambrahamic Faith
59:45
registers that. And that's that's what I'm trying to draw attention to that by that standard, which I think is a fair standard. We could say, "Hey, Western civilization, it's about monotheism
59:53
and and protecting the weak." Like, that would be something I could totally like get down with. Absolutely. Um, but I don't think that's what that's not what I'm saying necessarily. I don't
1:00:01
think that that's what the west is about. But that's what you know that's what Christianity is about just as a heristic like just if we imagine that but then we have to what I'm what I'm trying
1:00:10
to say is that then we have to live with the borders right of like where that extends and where that doesn't extend right and then so it becomes a question of consistency. That's
1:00:18
basically what I'm just trying to say is that is that yeah sure obviously that makes sense to include a Judeo-Christian but then it it doesn't make sense to include or to sorry it doesn't make
1:00:29
sense to exclude Islam from that conversation right because you know we haven't introduced a criterion by which like Islam would be excluded yet one thing that also Americans may not realize
1:00:38
I saw this really interesting thing I don't know how representative this was of what's actually the case in terms of Israeli public opinion but I saw this thing where someone was just doing these
1:00:46
street interviews and they were asking Jewish Israelis. Um, which religion is closer to Judaism,
1:00:53
Christianity or Islam? What do you think they said? I would guess they say Islam. Every single
1:00:58
one did because they know the law cuz we have law and they have law. I believe they were also asking uh Palestinian Muslim Palestinians the same question and they were saying, "Oh, Judaism."
1:01:08
Many Islamic scholars talk about that and they actually say of all the faith communities because in the sort of profology of Islam, we imagine as like this community followed this prophet,
1:01:17
this community followed that prophet. Of all the prophetic communities that existed that many of the scholars say that were were closest to Judaism um both in the figure of the prophet itself that
1:01:28
Muhammad was the most similar to Moses u more similar to Moses than Jesus. Um but then also
1:01:34
in the the role of the law, the role that the law plays in, you know, the everyday ritual worship and these sorts of things. I mean kosher and halal and these things are very similar. Can I can I say
1:01:43
what I think the actual like Sure. So one thing that I think is kind of awkward for you mentioned
1:01:48
Nick Fuentes earlier. He's a Christian nationalist and he's like the most famous anti-semit in America. Right. Right. Maybe in the world. Um be I think because I see the significance of this
1:01:58
Judeo-Christian category, I like his perspective sort of doesn't make sense to me, you know,
1:02:04
because it's like he almost seems to have this sort of pagan view about like strength and mocked
1:02:10
politic and stuff. Yeah. Um which is just kind of weird coming from a Christian. And I don't know
1:02:16
if like anti-Jewish bigotry makes sense from that perspective. But another thing about it is like he wants to be like nationalistic and pro-western and stuff, but like who killed Jesus? Like the
1:02:26
Romans killed Jesus. I mean, I guess you could say the Jews, the Jewish priests betrayed Jesus, but that was like exaggerated. Like crucifixion was a I think Muslims maybe don't think Jesus
1:02:36
was crucified, but within the Christian framework, there was the intent anyway. So yeah, crucifixion
1:02:42
was a capital punishment of Rome. Yes. Right. And it was used against among other people like
1:02:48
Jewish rebels against Rome. Yes. So that's kind of the origins of Christianity like a Jewish rabbi
1:02:56
rebelling in a kind of unique way against Rome. Not not trying to lead like a violent revolution
1:03:02
or stir up controversy or something just through the power of his moral message. Yeah. Right. Um,
1:03:08
and in some ways I think that this is like kind of a an integral animating tension of the western
1:03:15
world is that it's like it be it became united by Christendom. That's kind of what united the west.
1:03:20
That's where its borders how its borders were basically drawn. Um, but there was like this tension between its like Roman pagan antiquity and and and the value the metaphysical and ethical
1:03:31
core of Christianity. And you see this playing out in all sorts of ways. Like with the Renaissance, it was kind of a looking back to like, you know, pre-Christian standards, ideals of beauty,
1:03:39
right? Um, and you know, it's messy. Like there's no clean way to to tell the story,
1:03:46
but I think that's kind of what's interesting, you know. Yeah. So, does that give us forgive me for, you know, like pressing, but like are we any close to being able to define what is Western
1:03:55
civilization or what is what is the common core? What is the thing that we that western civilization rallies around that distinguishes it from other things? I think this whole complicated
1:04:06
story I just told and I'm sure other civilizations also have a complicated tension between the polytheistic European Roman heritage and the and the Christian one. There's certainly a lot there.
1:04:18
Yeah. Okay. I mean that that's interesting. I mean I I don't have prescriptive or evaluative thoughts about it. I have I have to think about it like but that's interesting to think about.
1:04:26
I mean, I imagine if I knew more about Islamic history and the history of Islamic countries,
1:04:32
uh, it would also be a quite complicated story. It always is. The map is never the terrain. The terrain is always more complicated than the map. Um, and even the way in which, you know,
1:04:40
I I should have brought a copy of my book. I would have given it to you happily. Um, because there's a section in it where my colleague Dr. Susan Douglas who actually is local to this area. She
1:04:50
was a retired professor at Georgetown. um where she describes the uh the ideological dimension to
Ideological Dimension to Archeology and Western Civilisation
1:04:57
archaeology and sacred archaeology that the sense of the Holy Land, right? The mental imagery that
1:05:02
we have virtually on every inside cover of every Bible, right, is Palestine, right, or that area,
1:05:09
right? She makes a very interesting argument that back further in time, they extended those
1:05:16
borders in their mental imaginary that it actually extended down uh into what's today Saudi Arabia.
1:05:21
discussion for another time. But even some of the things without being purely deconstructivist, but but genealogy does have a use to see where if there are interventions at certain places
1:05:33
or things that we forgot that let's say if if forgetting is necessary and it is I agree with
1:05:38
your point there. Forgetting is necessary to function uh and fruitful to thrive. Yeah. Not
1:05:43
just to function also to thrive. But there there still can be things that we forget that are that
1:05:49
are important to remember, right? that could become blind spots. And so I guess trying to plum what are the things that are forgotten that are worth remembering and those which are better
1:05:58
left forgotten, that's a whole other a whole other thing. Um I know I I I opened up a ton of
1:06:04
threads. Um I'm trying to think if we if we closed most of them. We talked about Judeo Christian. We talked about oh your comments or your your reaction to this idea about maybe it's already
1:06:14
put to bed with with your last response but the the possibility of a tension between a values
1:06:22
anchored western civilization versus a racial or ethnic anchored western civilization. Um feel free
1:06:32
to pass just something that I think about. Yeah it's it's an interesting question. And I think
1:06:38
maybe some kind of distinction probably does have to be made in this case between America and Europe and between the different countries in Europe because America is such a multi-racial,
1:06:47
multithnic, multi-religious country at already. So if you're talking about imposing some sort
1:06:53
of racial standard on American nationality and American citizenship, uh it seems like the only
1:06:59
way to get there would be through like some ugly violent phase that I don't support. Um,
1:07:05
as a general matter, as a general principle though, I do think that whatever countries are
1:07:10
still relatively homogeneous in uh in Europe that want to remain that way should have a right to do
1:07:15
so. Right? I don't think it's like evil to think in terms of nationality, real like ethnic an a
1:07:22
nation is an ethnicity. It's an ethn ethnic group that wants a state or that has a state, right? And ethnicities are differently defined, right? Sometimes you can have a multi-racial ethnicity.
1:07:33
Right. I mean, arguably the Jews are like fit in that category because there's this ambiguity about
1:07:39
how how they're religiously defined or ethnically defined or racially defined. But I would say, you know, a lot of people they think that the values based form of human collectivity is just obviously
1:07:50
superior than than the other one. And I'm not so sure about that. If you think about a family, for example, maybe a family prides itself on how hard they work and they think of themselves that
1:08:00
way. We're the Johnson's and we work so hard. we've always worked so hard. My grandpa worked hard. His grandpa worked hard. It's always been that way. Okay, that's not essential to the family
1:08:10
actually. And if the family misperceives that to be the essence of the family, that means that they
1:08:16
might kick out a lazy daughter, right? Or they might let in some stranger who's just hardworking and they have nothing in common with otherwise. It doesn't make sense. And that's not how humans
1:08:25
really tend to operate. I mean we like the familiarity of local customs and being rooted in
1:08:31
the ground in the land I should say. Um you know we like to be generally people like to be around
1:08:38
those like themselves and that can take different configurations right like um you know one thing
1:08:45
that's kind of interesting is just the way that people speak the English language. If I'm talking to like an East Asian person who speaks English in a totally American accent I kind of feel this like
1:08:55
natural connection to them. You know what I mean? So there's like, you know, it's not like race and
1:09:00
values are the only options. There there's like a deep cultural similarity that also can come into
1:09:06
play. Yeah, it's interesting to think of and again these are halfbaked thoughts. Um I I I get what you're saying and it's certainly true. I would say that that sometimes values can also be
1:09:16
not just like essential in gatekeeping, but but aspirational as well, right? that you're you're trying to hold uh out an aspiration for people to strive for. Um which prevents the opposite problem
1:09:28
which is people who check the box of a type of yeah even familiarity but um their morals are
Can we base Society on Liberal Values?
1:09:35
something that could put you at risk in various ways or or run society into the ground. We talk
1:09:40
about you know the porn industry or Only Fans or all of these horrible things. The proliferation of sports betting which is just out of control. Everything is draft. I would totally ban all these
1:09:49
things in charge. Me as well. Yeah. So I mean like um that's why I'm you know it is it is um you know
1:09:57
contrived right like but that's so what's weird about it's it's not just weird to base a society on values but to base a society on liberal values I think can lead to disaster cuz like liberal
1:10:06
values are that you allow the proliferation of these things because it's all about individual choice. Right. Right. Yeah. And you know, maybe this is something that's kind of similar between a
1:10:15
right-wing perspective and an Islamic perspective. Like, um, I I don't think a society can really
1:10:21
survive that way. I do think that morality has to come into the picture in terms of like guiding the citizenry so that we don't all just degenerate to the lowest common denominator and we don't,
1:10:31
you know, think about things in terms of, you know, how pleasurable the sensations are, right?
1:10:37
We need standards and they need to be upheld preferably to the extent possible by just um you
1:10:45
know people setting examples in terms of how they behave and how they dress and how fit they keep themselves. Um but sometimes government can come into play there. Like I don't think people 100
1:10:57
years ago could have imagined that in 2026 teenage boys would be walking around with a a screen that
1:11:05
they could access that allows them to access endless streams of pornography whenever they want. Right? This is like a our brains are not evolved for that reality. And obviously there's
1:11:16
going to be significant social problems that result as if we don't get a handle on that, right?
1:11:23
You know. Yeah. No, actually I I agree 100%. And and I think from a political theory perspective, right? Like there's there's a gradient, right? It's not a black and white choice.
1:11:31
Like if you want to go even within secularism, there's various types of secularism. There's, you know, French lic extremely aggressive type of secularism. American and British secularism
1:11:39
a little bit less than that. You know, we've got a little bit more on on free exercise. Um,
1:11:46
and then other versions of state incentivized morality. Like there are Islamic paradigms, there
1:11:54
are confucutionist paradigms out there that people talk about. There's lots of different societies. It's not always a clean break. Like that's the thing. Like I think that these are really
1:12:00
fruitful and interesting conversations to have especially if people are are wedded to a hyper
1:12:07
liberal politics and and societyy's going to hell essentially and everybody's addicted and everybody is fractured and their birth rates are down and all these other things that are happening. Um
1:12:17
you can wed yourself to an ideology, right? But at some point what's going to work? What's going
1:12:24
to turn things around? At what point do you reassess right the arrangement and and wonder
1:12:29
um because even you know I I don't believe I don't think uh even in a theoretical way in a neutrality
1:12:36
I think that there's always going to be like I believe that you can create a uh a free market
1:12:42
I can you can protect that space so that various competitors can uh try to argue and persuade and
1:12:47
present and and different things but even that every market has to have some sort of regulation for who enters and who leaves the market right um in the sense that nobody should be able to lie,
1:12:56
right? In the in the the course of persuasion, nobody should be able to coers somebody or force somebody to to enter into an exchange, right? So there's certain ground rules that every space has
1:13:06
to abide by that um my view of governance is that governance is the one that sets the rules that of
1:13:13
the market where people enter and then hopefully we hope the truth wins in the end. I think also
1:13:19
I mean more broadly we need and now I'll sound like a total conservative which I am like we need
1:13:25
strong families because who are the individuals entering that market? Absolutely. You need the shaping forces of a family to turn a person into an individual whose choices are meaningful because
1:13:35
they're a unique personality who also has a sense of responsibility about their choices. Otherwise,
1:13:41
you know, what are they going to buy in the market? How are they going to use this freedom? They're not going to use it in a way that's conducive to their own thriving
1:13:48
or to societies. Yeah, absolutely. I I even have a hotter take than that. I used to joke, but I'm I'm only half joking when I said that, you know, you should be married and have kids if
1:13:56
you want to produce social theory. It's like even the phenomenon of all of these college folks that
1:14:01
many of them are are unmarried and most of them don't have kids. Like making the theory that's that's driving the academia, I think it's severely flawed. I think you know, you have to have right
1:14:10
just because you need a stake in the future. Yeah. Skin in the game. Yeah. You have skin in the game. And as you said, there's just a different There is a different thing that happens to you when
1:14:17
you become a parent, when you become responsible for the lives of others in a extremely immediate and structural way. Not that it's deterministic, it's stochastic. There's bad parents out there.
1:14:25
There's people that can be parents and screw up everything. But that doesn't mean that um you know, exceptions don't make rules. I think that I think that it's a mistake to to
1:14:34
put so much of the knowledge production on a segment of society that is has a very tenuous
1:14:41
and distant relationship from from family life and from child rearing. Um and that brings the last
1:14:48
the last string of questions or or area I was um you know hoping to explore was about about Muslims
1:14:53
and Islam in America. So, if we're talking about what does it mean to be Western civilization, then how do Muslims and how does Islam fit into this whole picture? I mean, there's things,
1:15:03
you know, people always want to point out like Thomas Jefferson had a Quran personal a personal copy and between 10 and 30% of the slaves that were brought here from West Africa
1:15:10
were originally Muslims. Um, obviously data is is hard to come by, but that's what scholars are
Is Islam a Threat to Western Civilisation?
1:15:16
saying. Huntington says that this is some sort of civilizational threat. We're probing at what makes Western civilization Western civilization. You know, the 60s happened, although a fifth
1:15:26
of the Muslim population in America is either multigenerational African-American or converts
1:15:32
like myself. After the 60s, mass immigration from the Muslim world, here they are, right?
1:15:38
They're hitting second and third generation. How does islam a threat or one question is,
1:15:45
islam a threat to Western civilization? That's kind of like a cheap question. The second question though is how much of the animous against Islam and Muslims is genuine,
1:15:58
organic, even justified versus how much is um is propaganda and coordinated? And the third,
1:16:05
what does the future of America look like with with Muslims integrated? What does integration
1:16:13
look like? How does if we have an ideal of Western civilization or America, how do Muslims fit into
1:16:20
what that ideal looks like? First, you mentioned Huntington. I I just want to say something because I think the general Huntingtonian framework of civilizations is in many ways profound. It's
1:16:30
preent and I think he himself kind of misapplied the principles of this framework, right? Like I
1:16:38
believe he was a supporter of the Iraq war. And to me that makes no sense within this civilizational framework because you know Huntington gives the tools to see liberal values universal values as
1:16:47
paradox paradoxically being kind of parochial values. They're western values. They're not actual universal in the sense that we should like impose them on other people. We shouldn't
1:16:56
try to spread democracy and freedom uh to other countries because first how do you interpret
1:17:01
what those words mean? Are you just imposing a kind of western civilizational construct on Iraq for example? It's probably not going to work. there's probably a lot of complexities
1:17:10
to the society that you don't understand because you're not part of that civilization. So, I think that there I don't think civilizational views I I I I regret that they've become associated
1:17:21
with this kind of neoconservatism. Um, as far as whether Islam is a threat to the West, I have to
1:17:27
be honest. I think if Islamic immigration proceeds at a very fast rate in Europe,
1:17:34
Europe and America are different in this regard. we have much lower levels of Muslim immigrants and our Muslim immigrants tend to be like high earning and you know more upper class and
1:17:45
um better assimilated. That's not the case in like Paris for example. And I think any social cohesion
1:17:53
is threatened by any form of sudden influx of different people. Like you can't get away from
1:17:59
that, right? So in the American context, how would I want to deal with this? I would want to deal with this not through developing some abstraction like going into my room and thinking, okay, how do
1:18:10
we make this work? You know, I I think that the way you deal with it is you have an immigration moratorum and you let the people who are here get to know each other, so to speak, right? And
1:18:20
people will naturally get to know each other as I said different sort of customs will evolve and
1:18:27
a process of assimilation will take place and also a process of a change to the country you know to to the people who are not immigrants or children of immigrants um will also take place
1:18:37
and that is probably the most conservative not in the ideological sense but in just the sense
1:18:43
of being kind of riskaverse way to approach this because if we get to a situation where no one
1:18:49
can understand each other maybe literally in terms of their not having the same language, not having
1:18:55
the same kind of grammar in a more cultural sense, not recognizing the same norms or having respect
1:19:01
for the same historical figures or practice, you know, like that's a recipe for disaster. I think
1:19:07
like I don't want to impose a kind of homogeneity, but I think that this can organically evolve in
1:19:13
a basically fine way through a severe immigration moratorum. Right? So that's what I would support.
1:19:19
Maybe it's not a popular opinion among your audience, but I think that's the point of this show. Well, yeah, it's it's to talk about it and and yeah, it's that opens up a couple questions
1:19:27
that that are interesting. So, one of them is um you know, with the example of Europe. Okay. So,
1:19:33
one of the things as you know, like when the when the left is talking about immigration, um they
1:19:40
discuss the um the push factors, right? rather than the pull factors of like well why are there
1:19:47
so many Algerians in France well it's because Algeria got colonized by France very brutally
A Nations Responsibility over Immigration Patterns
1:19:52
by the way right so there seems to be always this blowback right not saying that that's the only
1:19:57
cause of migration of course that would be that would be simplistic but there's there almost seems
1:20:03
to be like a historical process involved here um how much is it a 50-50 split like how much
1:20:08
responsibility um do nations have to stop the root causes of a lot of what tease off this immigration
1:20:19
that then they you know even if we're going to say yeah I mean like you're right to complain about it but at the same time right this is blowback and a historical consequence for destabilizing societies
1:20:29
and ruining what they they had most people I assume right if Algeria had not been destabilized
1:20:36
and ruined if Iraq had not been destabilized and totally just like Syria like all these places
1:20:42
My maybe naive assumption is that people would like to stay in their homes where they're from,
1:20:47
that they would not like to come uh to the US or to the UK or to or to France or anywhere else. But
1:20:54
what complicates things is that when imperialistic um foreign policies are very much destabilizing
1:21:01
these places, then there becomes this almost mutually I don't know what to call it. there
1:21:09
there is a a relationship that's forged between these two these two peoples or these two nations.
1:21:15
Um so where does the responsibility fall? Like how does that how does that figure into this as well?
1:21:22
It's a good question. I mean it's one reason that I am opposed broadly to warriors in the Middle
1:21:28
East. Consistent. No, that's very consistent. Yeah, I see that. And you know it's not the only driver of immigration. And I think a big driver of immigration in recent decades is just
1:21:35
the development of new communications technologies and a reduction in the costs of transportation.
1:21:42
It's just become easy to see what life is like in a different society and then to move there if you want uh physically. But but you're right that these these uh migration crises that we've seen
1:21:51
from from the Middle East in recent years have you know American militarism has a lot to do with them
1:21:57
obviously, right? Um, and Europe actually kind of pays the consequences more than the United
1:22:04
States does for that, which makes me wonder why they're uh so content to just continue relying
1:22:09
on our security umbrella because it seems like we're actually causing them a lot of problems, including political problems um destabilization within their societies because, you know,
1:22:18
a lot of there's a lot of push back in in all of these European countries. So yeah, I think I think
1:22:24
uh I think a main reason to oppose militarism from a conservative perspective is this recognition
1:22:31
that it's going to destabilize these societies and cause these migration crisis. You know, that's not
1:22:37
the only reason I don't want to do it. I also don't think we should kill people unless like we have to like military force should be a last resort resort. Um although it can, you know, play
1:22:47
a role in advancing the national interest. Like I'm not a pacifist. Mhm. Um so yeah, I broadly
1:22:53
agree with that point. Um and I think more people should make that point. And you know, we're seeing
1:22:59
now uh this I think this is something that that needs to be said in the context of Latin America
1:23:04
as well as we're seeing the Trump administration try to figure out a new Monroe doctrine as it's
1:23:09
called. Um, so far it seems like they're not wanting to push uh military intervention that
1:23:15
would result in like a widespread migration crisis, but that is a significant risk here if
1:23:21
things go sideways in Venezuela, for example. And that would that blowback would affect America primarily absolutely rather than Europe. Absolutely. And and another that that brings us
1:23:30
to another major cause of immigration, which is um I think predatory economic policies such as NAFTA,
1:23:37
right? and those sorts of things that um are done at the behest of corporations to provide a steady stream of cheap labor that the average American can't survive on. Right. I think
1:23:47
that that that has to be there as part of the question that so that's that's my concern with um of course you know you've been very consistent uh philosophically but but in the discourse when I
1:23:57
see a lot of the eye directed at the at immigrants themselves um with full recognition that of course
1:24:04
hey if any group of people there's going to be a certain percentage that are criminals there's going to be a certain percentage that this is not like you know giving anybody that's where
1:24:11
that moral individualism I think is significant that we we like to to judge people by their
1:24:16
the content of their character and their their own deeds and actions. But um I don't see at least in
Migration, Moral Individualism and Cheap Labour
1:24:22
the mainstream discourse enough attention being being put to the the the push factors that caused
1:24:29
people to be mass expelled. Why why did so many you know Mexicans especially after in the '9s,
1:24:34
you know, they come to the United States NAFTA was a huge part of that, right? The undermining of um of their own systems, economic systems, the undermining of the working class here in America.
1:24:45
Um, you know, it's no secret. I mean, my dad was a working-class labor. Like, that type of guy is extinct. You can't really make uh hold a household, lead a household,
1:24:57
right, with with those types of jobs anymore. The the fact that those jobs can those employers can
1:25:02
get away with that is largely because they have a steady stream of of very cheap labor coming in. So, I see that as as also another thing that needs to be remedied. Um, in addition, I I don't think
1:25:12
anything that you said is out of pocket. I mean like if if you take governance again I I come back um to to issues of governance that in order for a society to function there has to be a certain
1:25:23
common base understanding between the people within that territory. I think that's a fairly common sense proposition and that's actually what civics is supposed to do right civics is supposed
1:25:32
to establish and we can have lots of interesting and specific conversations as to the content uh
1:25:38
of those civics or what does that regime look like? What are the practices and beliefs of of that civics? Um, how is it communicated? How is it taught? What are the boundaries of it? Where
1:25:47
what's done through the schools versus what's left for home and the church or the mosque or the synagogue? Those are all really interesting questions, but I think the basic premise is solid.
1:25:56
Um, so if you have any thoughts on on the economic piece, you're you're feel you're um you're you're
1:26:02
free to comment. Um, but the the last thing I wanted to touch on with immigration, let's let's imagine a moratorium is achieved. Let's imagine that the civics catches up, okay? That
1:26:13
people now we have a a civic we can say that we have a civic society in America. What does we're
1:26:19
restarting immigration? Okay, like what does that immigration policy look like with a clean slate?
1:26:26
What do you think it should look? What's a common sense immigration policy? I think a common sense immigration policy is to prioritize countries of origin that are similar to the country
1:26:36
that the immigrants are moving to culturally, right? And that's going to attenuate some of
1:26:42
these assimilation challenges and social cohesion challenges. And you know, there's not one standard
1:26:50
for what constitutes cultural compatibility. It doesn't even necessarily be need to be an
1:26:55
intracivilizational thing as we were talking about earlier. Um, but I think that that should be the
1:27:01
standard and it's okay if the standard remains a little vague so that statesmen, states women can
1:27:07
kind of figure out, you know, what is needed at the moment. But you know, immigration, it serves
1:27:12
different kinds of purposes. I mean, you mentioned that big businesses have pushed for immigration from countries where the incoming immigrant will be satisfied with a low wage. You know,
1:27:21
that's obviously been the case. That's the kind of the main driver. Bernie Sanders, I think, famously
1:27:26
told Ezra Klein, um, open borders. No, that's like a Koch brothers thing. Koch brothers idea.
1:27:33
That's like a billionaire class idea. We don't want that. That's bad for the American worker. I actually think that perspective was a little um uh contradictory on Bernie Sanders part um because,
1:27:44
you know, socialism is supposed to be this kind of universal thing. So, it's like on what basis do you prioritize the American worker? I imagine Bernie Sanders wouldn't have a very good answer to
1:27:53
that question. Um, maybe he would. I don't know. Um, but yeah, I don't know. It seems like a little
1:28:01
abstract after the moratorum is achieved. What I think I think I think the country would look a lot different. But, you know, we've done this before in the United States. Um I can't give you
1:28:11
precise dates so apologies for how schematic this is but we have had influxes of immigrants
1:28:16
and a perception that this was like destabilizing and we needed to get a hold on this and then we have a sharp reduction um in immigration and then things kind of smooth out. Interesting. So, I mean
1:28:29
I mean much of this, you know, um this has been a very very thoughtful and and thoughtprovoking
1:28:34
conversation and I like the fact that there's a lot of things that need like further thought and and and spelling them out. Um I see I see what you're saying with with immigration. I I guess my
1:28:45
one my one fear and this comes back to the tension that I highlighted with the tension between the
Compatibility of Self and Nation State
1:28:51
values-based maybe that has something to do with compatibility that that's interesting to think I
1:28:56
have to think more about that versus the um the ethnic or race-based um idea of solidarity or
1:29:05
group identity or or whatever we're going for here and this applies to Europe as well that you know
1:29:12
I wonder, you know, and this perhaps this comes out of my experiences being an Italian-American
1:29:20
because, you know, as an Italian-American, there's a saying that there's no Italians except outside
1:29:26
of Italy, right? It's like like like the national identity is very weak uh among ital that people
1:29:33
have way more um Venetians, my family's Venetian, do not consider themselves having much in common
1:29:40
with Sicilians. Sure. uh to the point where if a southern Italian soccer team travels up north,
1:29:46
they'll put banners in the stand saying welcome to Italy, right? It's like it's it's it's it's known, it's very uh it's it's acrimonious there almost to a laughable degree. And so there is this question.
1:29:58
It's like, okay, Italy is for the Italians. What's an Italian? You know, it's like these things are actually um you know, well, there's Venetians and then there's there's Florentians
1:30:07
and there's Genevese and there's Calabrians and there's all these these people and identities I
1:30:12
guess without sounding, you know, like a leftist. I mean, there's some fluidity to it. There's some
1:30:18
fluidity to it. They they coalesce and then they get complicated and they continue to change. And
1:30:24
you indicated that. I'm not I'm not trying to to imply that that you you uh didn't indicate that
1:30:29
when you're talking about the the birectionality of change, right, that happens. Let's imagine that
1:30:35
civics regime where everybody kind of gets that common core of whatever we decide is going to happen. Like it is a birectional change, right? Biryani can become the the state uh food of UK.
1:30:46
I mean, I know people chafe at that, but but it's a possibility, you know, in in a world where it
1:30:51
could be done through Yeah. cultural change tea, British tea. It comes from India. I mean, it's
1:30:57
not what makes it British, right? Like so my my overall concern with putting too much investment
1:31:08
in the group dynamics of of of ethnicity and race is that is that it just doesn't work at a
1:31:18
certain point in the sense that history moves and these groups of people are continuously forming
1:31:26
and dispanding and forming and dispanding And I almost wonder if there needs to be a proactive
1:31:33
role in steering and shaping where that goes rather than what I fear is not amongst you but
1:31:41
a lot of people common person a more reactive take as to no no stop this is too this is too
1:31:48
much this is too fast even if there's a point like actually it was very fascinating because you know when I went to uh I went to Ireland and I was put up in a hotel outside of Dublin
1:31:58
And I was dismayed because in the outskirts of Dublin, um, it was a hotel that looked
1:32:06
like every other hotel here in a strip mall that looked like every other strip mall here with McDonald's and and all like total homogeniz neoliberal homogenizes completely. And I was like,
1:32:18
I get I understand the sense of threat. I really do. It is. It is maddening to You're also seeing
1:32:26
this other interesting thing in Dublin where you have Irish pubs like it's like a similacrim,
1:32:31
right? Exactly. Exactly. Exactly. Like so I I get the point. Um but what I what I see like that way
1:32:41
of life is under threat. Absolutely. There is a culture that is besieged, that is under threat,
1:32:46
and people should be upset about that because our age and our era is one in which the common man has
1:32:52
just been, you know, stomped on and walked over and trashed and very disempowered. My
1:33:00
enduring concern is that the the object of is misplaced that so much attention is being put
1:33:08
on the immigrants themselves rather than these two. If we want to talk about one big bucket,
1:33:14
the military destabilization that causes mass migration or accelerates it at least and and the refugee crisis on one hand and then the e economic policies where these are the big corporations and
1:33:23
they're given cart blanch to do whatever they want to do and they are the drivers behind a lot of
1:33:28
this. I guess my my my hope is that people would put more attention and blame, let's say, to the
1:33:38
real what I see as the real forces behind it and realize that whether it's with the local Muslim,
1:33:44
if they're an immigrant, or if they're not an immigrant, that there's actually a lot more room for commonality and that birectional enrichment and that, you know, civic grounding or whatever.
1:33:53
I think that there's tremendous opportunity for that. Um, so it's the it's dialing in that
1:33:58
balance. I guess that's my overall concern. Yeah. I mean, certainly I agree about neoliberalism
1:34:03
and homogenization. I mean, this kind of aesthetic, this totally character characterless,
1:34:09
rootless like aesthetic um that is taking over the world. And you know, this is something that annoys me about kind of liberal ideology and this idea of multiculturalism is that it obliterates
1:34:20
the boundaries that constitute the multiplicity of cultures, right? like it's actually in a way
1:34:26
undermining of diversity on a global scale. Yes. But but one thing that I can't help but think when
1:34:32
you're talking is so much of this conversation and focus is on like the west as if the west was
1:34:39
like uniquely averse to immigration or something when it's totally the opposite. I mean the west
1:34:44
is what's experiencing an influx of immigrants. There's it's often the case that these uh people that are fleeing uh uh you know Muslim majority countries because of maybe of US militarism or
1:34:54
for some other reason they can't really find a home in in a in a different M Muslim country like Saudi Arabia has a pretty strict immigration policy if all of them are completely authoritarian
1:35:04
and very arbitrary as well. I don't know if you remember some years back when um they had that spat with Canada. Yeah. Yeah. So they had they gave everybody 24 hours if you had a Canadian
Should Westerners accept Immigration
1:35:13
passport you had to leave. Mhm. I mean it was very very heavy-handed. Same with China. I mean, they're not destabilized by these immigration crisis cuz you're just not getting in. I mean,
1:35:21
they allow It's not like 100% of people in China are honestly not the case. You know, they famously have the weaguers have some trouble. But it's like, you know,
1:35:30
this this is like an expectation that people have of the West. There's this kind of browbeating and this moralizing about, oh, the West, it's going to drift back to this like ethnic conception of
1:35:39
itself when it's sort of weird to me because the West is the liberal place, right? like the only
1:35:44
reason this argument works is because of liberal morality because Westerners kind of feel guilty, right? And I I don't like that. I don't like guilt or pity. And I also don't like meanness. So,
1:35:55
I'm not advocating like people be like mean to immigrants, but I I do think that, you know, the people in Ireland, they won't just object to the idea of neoliberalism, although I'm sure I do.
1:36:04
I'm sure it's I'm I'm sure I'm I'm sure in Ireland they do have people who object to like McDonald's and stuff. They also object to Muslim immigration. Mhm. How do you respond to that objection? Well,
1:36:14
that's interesting. I think that for me, I'm coming from uh a different historical perspective
1:36:19
because when I think about I I see it as a problem of modern nation states in general. Okay. Um,
1:36:25
I see that the the the reigning technology for governance, which is the ethnation state,
1:36:31
I see a fundamental weakness or arbitrariness in requiring a homogeneous ethnic identity in order
1:36:39
to draw strength that casts uh an ethnic other as a threat. Um, not saying that they can't be
1:36:48
threats, of course they can. But when I look at state building or different types of governance
1:36:55
that existed before the nation state, if you look at the age of empires or this that or the third,
1:37:01
there were different ways of ordering society that didn't seem to be so exclusionary. M um and
1:37:09
I s I I I see in those models where diversity was leveraged for more power and enrichment
1:37:17
that I see as we're kind of impoverished in these days or almost like we have two extremes. I think
1:37:23
like either we're impoverished in in the sense of like uh deprivation or it's forced on us and then
1:37:28
we can't you know we don't even have a choice about it. Right? If I were to just again just because I'm more familiar with it go back to the Ottoman Empire and you know you you you had the
1:37:38
ability to relocate fairly easily like within the entire empire there was the millet system which
1:37:43
accommodated a surprising for that time amount of autonomy if you were depending on your religious
1:37:49
group if you were a Christian you could live a Christian life if you were a Jew you could live a Jewish life in fact you know most of the Jews that fled Spain after the reconista went to the
1:37:57
Ottoman Empire like very very many of them did on boats that the Ottoman Sultan provided. Right? So,
1:38:04
that's more of what I'm hearkening back to. I I I agree with uh with with uh I don't like double
1:38:09
standards, right? I agree with that entirely. And and I don't think much of these so-called Muslim I
1:38:14
know that from a population perspective, people think of them as Muslim countries, but they're just dictatorships, just secular dictatorships, the Gulf States. Yeah. They all of them to
1:38:22
be honest with you. They all instrumentalize religion in very very, you know, typical secular
1:38:28
Machavelian ways. Um, but when I think back a couple centuries and I think about the different
1:38:33
types of polities that existed, I I see I just see a different way of relating to diversity and what
1:38:41
that means for governance, what that means for civics, what that means for like for I'll give you a very specific example. The the you know, okay, here's a provocative example, but it's a good one,
1:38:49
I think. The Armenian existence within the Ottoman Empire for centuries, they were understood as the
1:38:58
the trustworthy. They they had a name for them. They would call them the trustworthy minority,
1:39:03
right? Um Armenians were Christians. The Ottomans were Muslims, right? They Armenians led led a a
1:39:10
thriving life for a long long time. Once you get to the 1800s and you know I I know I've
1:39:17
got some Ottoman historians watching me and I I feel you. You can correct me. But my hypothesis
1:39:22
and I had Walak confirm this hypothesis. So you can also take it up with him that they underwent
1:39:29
uh a policy. They were never colonized by an outside power, but they did go they did undergo a nationalization within themselves. They basically converted the Ottoman Empire into an ethno nation
1:39:39
state under tremendous outside pressures from the Russians and then also from the British and there were lots of things going on. But when you started to see the massacres that happened towards the end
1:39:48
of the century against the Armenians, against the Kurds, not it wasn't always some people tried to portray it as a Muslim Christian thing. It was and it was also against Muslims too of different
1:39:57
ethnicities. The Kurds, Circasians, Armenians, Assyrians. You start to see these these pograms.
Ethnic Violence related to Ethno-Nation States?
1:40:03
You start to see these ethnic violence. I can't help but think that there's something there that's
1:40:08
in the DNA of even like the ethnonation state. That is something that has this this relationship
1:40:15
with with difference uh and diversity that is a bit it's just not as good as it could be. Maybe
1:40:23
I'll refer I'm losing my my vocabulary here. That that that doesn't seem like I get what you're
1:40:29
saying. And you know, I I broadly agree with your uh general like historical view of modern nation
1:40:35
states, I guess. I mean, if you've read like peasants into Frenchmen, like stuff like that, but there there was a kind of artificiality to the construction of modern nation states often
1:40:44
for military reasons. Um a a need to to kind of homogenize the population, get everyone speaking
1:40:50
the same language, educated in the same way, you know. Um and and that does make you know maybe
1:40:56
that does particip that kind of figures difference is threatening. Um but it's not like it's not like
1:41:01
this stuff just started happening with modern nation states. I mean our ancient you know our
1:41:07
prehistorical tribal past as hunter gatherers was like very violent like the arch the archaeological
1:41:13
record suggests that you know when different tribes collided it was like very you know they
1:41:19
would go to war basically. Um, so I think this might be something that's actually inside humans,
1:41:26
you know, not not just inside nation states. And if that's the case, I mean, I think we should be
1:41:33
careful with with with diversity, right? Like it could be the case that that we're increasing the
1:41:41
the possibility of of of violence. Um so that's I again I think that the moratorium idea is just
1:41:50
better and like we need to calm the temperature obviously I don't condone and certainly I don't
1:41:55
support any kind of like meanness towards someone on the basis of their you know ethnicity obviously
1:42:02
you know um but it does seem like diversity has a kind of correlation with conflict with social
1:42:09
conflict right and that's something to be mindful of and that doesn't necessarily mean that oh we just have to impose liberal ideology on people. It could be the case that we just kind of chill
1:42:18
out on the diversity and and this is an important conversation because diversity has become like the
1:42:24
value of liberalism, right? It's like the word itself. I'm sure if you looked at one of these graphs that you can look at on Google like how often it's used, I'm sure it like shot up in like
1:42:33
the 70s or something. Sure. Um and that's very odd, you know. Um and that should be questioned
1:42:41
and deconstructed and it can be so without a kind of general outburst of meanness toward minorities,
1:42:48
you know. I mean the America's a you should be happy like America is a diverse country, you know.
1:42:54
Yeah, absolutely. And and uh and Americans seem broadly uh happy about that fact. Like opinion
1:43:01
polls don't reveal any kind of like Americans might be like the least racist people in the world for all I know. Um but there is a need here for kind of responsibly managing this and making
1:43:13
sure that it doesn't lead to like uh some sort of disaster in the future. Making sure we have social cohesion and I don't think I don't think it's just modern nation states although I take your
1:43:24
point that they might have you know inflamed this hostility to difference in some ways. Yeah. No,
1:43:31
that's fair. That's fair. know the overall I think the overall point about regulation of course from a from a governance standpoint things must be regulated if they're not then it's it's chaos and
1:43:40
the the the differences that come about are how to regulate and upon what and part of the interesting
1:43:46
part about the diversity conversation you know which has resulted in a lot of nonsensical
1:43:52
tokenism and and things of this nature. They bring us full circle back to this idea of, you know,
1:43:58
identity markers that are unchosen versus uh things that can be chosen like morals, right? Because then it's like, well, you can have um and many liberal institutions are very skilled
1:44:08
at rolling out um what looks like superficial diversity of u you know, colors and cultures
1:44:14
and various things um without diversity of worldviews, without diversity of of values.
1:44:20
So all of these things I think I'm I'm happy at how many other questions that we've come across
1:44:27
uh in this exploration. I'm sensitive. We're we're approaching two hours and uh don't want it to drag on too long. But uh thank you very much for your time, Andrew. This was a very pleasant
1:44:36
conversation. I appreciate it a lot and uh and lots to think about. Thanks for having us on.
1:44:41
Yeah, thanks. This was great. Asalamaikum. Now, you've reached the end of this show, and the fact
1:44:46
that you've stayed until the very end tells me that you truly believe in our work. Please consider making a one-off donation or becoming a member by visiting thinkingmuslim.com/membership.
1:44:58
Now, your contributions give you exclusive behind-the-scenes access and the ability to ask questions to our guests and monthly calls with myself,
1:45:06
my team, and our guests like Sami Hamdi and keep us in your duas.