Crony Capitalism and Female Soldiers | Tulsi Gabbard | EP 332

see I think Putin will settle for the devastation of Ukraine I think he could claim that as a victory the utter Devastation of the Ukraine because it stays out of Western hands but if Putin ever believed that his people even believed that they were now under attack let's say by German tanks let's say the probability that he's used a tactile Tactical Battlefield nuclear weapon seems to me to be extraordinarily high but for me it's like well why wouldn't he and the issue is well you don't want to escalates like yeah that's already factored into the decision the fact that they're even theorizing about any of this without recognizing the the very direct and real cost to human civilization on this planet we can look throughout history to see how U.S foreign policy especially in regime change Wars have failed so spectacularly in different regions around the world because they go and pick which dictator they like or don't like well we'll take this guy out replace him with this guy and then all of these disastrous unintended negative consequences come both for the United States and the people in these countries yet here we are now where we are facing that exact same Prospect with the country that has the most nuclear weapons in the entire world [Music] thank you hello everyone I'm here today with Tulsi gabbard an American politician commentator and a lieutenant colonel in the U.S Army Reserves she served as the U.S representative for Hawaii's second congressional district across four terms from 2013 until 2021 she was the first female combat veteran to run for president as well as the first Hindu member of Congress and the first Samoan American voting member both during and after her terms in office gabbard has been a formidable voice in the political space leaning right of Center despite her Democrat Origins with continued appearances on Fox News while retaining more Progressive views on topics such as drug legalization she is the host of her own program the Tulsi gabbard show where she continues to speak on relevant issues with the following Axiom firmly in mind country before party thank you very much for agreeing to talk to me today I'm looking forward to this conversation uh I thought maybe we'd start by talking about your experience your history with the Democrats if you could just walk us through that I mean you've had a well you had a stellar rise within the confines of the dev of the of the party and then a certain amount of friction and maybe you could just walk us through that you were elected very very young yes and so maybe we could start with that and and could you just tell the story of being involved with the Democrats well I so so I growing up here in Hawaii um it's a it's a beautiful place and and from a young age um had a pretty deep appreciation for the importance of um protecting this place you know protecting our oceans and the preservation of Clean Water we we get our water here from water aquifers and as the most remote island chain in the world protecting those resources are are essential for life and so my my um motivation and drive to run for the State House of Representatives here in Hawaii when I was 21 years old in 2002 really came from from that motivation to want to be in a position where I could actually do that you know I previously I had uh they wanted to build a big landfill over one of our big water aquifers here which you know even for me as a teenager seemed like such an absurd idea and risk because once that water is contaminated then it's it's done uh and so I was part of you know I went out and got petitions and signatures and joined others to be able to try to stop that because it was being um uh the wheels were being greased by a corrupt politician essentially he was trying to help his buddy who ran the landfill business and it was a great experience for me as a young person to be a part of stopping that from happening and that's what drove me to um to run for office when I was 21 years old it was not out of uh any kind of design like oh I'm gonna have this big political career and this will be the first stepping stone to get to somewhere else it was really driven by a desire to be of service and make that positive impact um I chose to be a Democrat uh you know my family was it wasn't one of those like Legacy party affiliation things that you just did I really was thoughtful at that time about uh which box I wanted to check in filing those papers to to run for office and you know for us here in Hawaii the origins of the democratic party really came from um a party that fought for people a kind of a more populist perspective we had Plantation workers who were being absolutely abused and take advantage of by the huge landowners here and in the state that was essentially being run by Elite wealthy Republicans at the time and uh it was a Democratic party that fought for those who didn't have a voice it was a Democratic party that celebrated civil liberties that celebrated freedom and individual thought this big tent party that really was rooted in kind of those those traditional liberal JFK esque ideals and it was a party that had many voices that spoke out for peace and so all of these different things really drew me to the Democratic party as a party that would fight for the voices of the people you know in Canada we have a socialist tradition the new Democratic party and I worked for them when I was a kid uh the man I worked for was the father of Alberta's last Premier uh second last Premier and a lot of the people that were involved in the NDP were labor leaders you know it was well known in Canada that the conservatives were the party of the establishment and the Liberals were well they played both sides against the middle very effectively and the Socialists the NDP British socialists rather than the Communist type we're really they're really the voice of the working class they're the voice of the unions and the working class needs a voice obviously and I think well the NDP did provide that to some degree in Canada and the Democrats historically did provide that that seemed to go pretty damn sideways with Clinton and I think it looked to me from from an outsider's point of view and I was rather appalled by this that the Democrats had decided to sacrifice their traditional base the working class um you know the the committed working class for something approximating the Pollux politics of division and this whatever this new narrative is of of Oppression and victimization and I don't think that worked out very well either as far as I could tell because my sense of the Clinton Trump debacle was that it wasn't so much that Trump won although he certainly did it was definitely the case that Clinton lost and I think she did that by sacrificing the interests of the working class Trump just vacuumed that up in no time flat masterfully I thought he seemed to have that ability to communicate with Working Class People interestingly enough and they trusted him at least they trusted him in comparison to Clinton yeah so okay so you were you were interested in the Democrats because of that working class voice tradition and you worked with the Democrats for a long time how long was your how long you you you ran when you were 21 that was in when 2000 that was in 2002. 2002 right so and when did you formally sever ties with the Democrats in October of last year 2022. right so it was basically 20 years yeah yeah um I did not spend all of that time in politics I left the state house when I uh volunteered to deploy with our Hawaii Army National Guard unit because the events of 9 11 like so many Americans um you know changed changed my life changed my perspective and and I had enlisted in the military motivated by what happened there to go after the the islamist terrorists who attacked us on that day and so I was I was campaigning for re-election here in Hawaii in 2004 um which looked to be a pretty easy re-election here and to continue the work I was doing our unit or the the National Guard unit was activated for a deployment to Iraq I was told by my commander you know congratulations you don't have to go your name is you know we've already got someone filling this job in the medical unit where I was serving so you can stay home and and you can continue doing what you're doing but I knew that there was no way there was just no way that I could stay back and work in some plush office in the state capitol and watch my brothers and sisters um in uniform go and deploy to war and these other side of the world and so I I left my re-election campaign and uh volunteered to deploy got trained in a different job that they needed filling in that medical unit uh and uh went off on an 18 month long deploy appointment so what do you what do you learn what do you learn from that exactly called out of your life what what did you learn so much uh so much about um the cost of War uh both in in in the loss of people who I was close to people who I served with as well as people who I I had never met one one the very first thing that I did in my job well I served in Iraq we were we were in a camp about 40 miles north of Baghdad and the very first thing that I did every single day that I was there was to go through a list of names of American Service soldiers who were serving all across that country uh who had been injured or hurt in combat the day before in the previous 24 hours and I had to go through that list Name by name to look to see if there were any of the soldiers from our Brigade which was about close to 3 000 people who were serving in four different parts of Iraq at the time to make sure that okay well this person has been injured they've been hurt where are they are they getting the care that they need are they able to um get what they need in country and return to duty do they need to be evacuated quickly and basically make sure that they had what they need whether they were staying in country we eventually got them back home uh to their families if they had to leave but every single day being confronted with the the high human cost of War um that is is just so often not discussed or talked about in the headlines or even thought about by politicians even if they might give lip service to it and also therefore coming from um you know serving in the state house and even some of our local politicians in Hawaii they would come out and visit the troops get the photo op be on the ground for maybe 24 48 hours and then go back and say all of these things as if they knew it was happening and and just the hypocrisy the hypocrisy of the politicians in Washington that voted for that war in Iraq but really without any care for the consequences of that decision or even thinking through what are we actually doing here is it serving the interests of the American people is it yeah well what and what were you doing there as far as you're concerned you know you've had lots of time to think about it now and you were actually there and so well for our our units our specific unit there uh was there to go after different terrorist elements this was kind of where Al Qaeda was growing stronger and obviously the rise of Isis would occur a little later after after we left but uh you know we we had a number of different infantry units that were going around in different areas and trying to seek out those insurgents uh that were attacking Americans and that was that was the specific mission that we had I was served in a medical unit and so we were we were providing care primarily for our American troops uh but also um going out and and trying to help provide care for local Iraqis in the area where we were I visited Abu ghraib prison this was after after the Scandal occurred but I visited the hospital Abu grave prison and was struck there about the medical care that was being provided there uh to to the prisoners um which was exactly the same kind of care that that we were providing to to Injured service members who were also in the country um but it was it was seeing past kind of the day-to-day tasks there in in the being exposed on the literally on the front lines to the war profiteering and the military-industrial complex the the Monopoly of KBR Halliburton uh making an immeasurable amount of money off of this war again this was I was there for all of 2005 in Iraq and that was in the early days uh and you look at what has happened since uh over the ensuing decades in Iraq and Afghanistan and and again you know my exposure in in Hawaii as a state legislator was very limited when it comes to foreign policy there wasn't you know a lot that I knew but being there experiencing it and at a basic level understanding government spending and taxpayer dollars and how are we using it the accountability and going and talking to these uh you know they called them they labeled them Third Country Nationals they would Import in from places like Nepal and the Philippines and Sri Lanka pay them pennies essentially compared to how much they were charging the federal government to do things like okay well we're going to cook food for the troops every day and you know I started asking well how you know if I walk into the chow hall tent or building or whatever and get a bowl of cereal and a banana for breakfast how much is how much how much is KBR Halliburton charging the U.S federal government for that and it was some outrageous price in 2005 it's like forty dollars per service member per meal they serve four meals a day and then started we made friends with with these people from the Philippines in Nepal and Sri Lanka who were working there after I was like how much you getting paid of 500 a month right 500 so so that that actually answers one of the questions I wanted to bring up later you know I guess you've answered it in two ways is that one of the reasons I have a certain sympathy for people like Bernie Sanders and more recently for people like both Russell Brand and Joe Rogan is because there's a there's a necessary voice on the left that targets something like corporate governance government media collusion at the highest levels yes construction of these gigantic tentacled multilateral organizations that engage in regulatory capture and then turn into let's say what Eisenhower warned everybody about in relationship to the military-industrial complex and there's a necessary voice on the left that I don't think precisely should be striving against capitalism per se I think that's the big mistake but should be striving against fascist corporate government collusion and we should all be striving against that that's for sure it'd be nice to get that straightened out but you did yeah I think answer some of my question about why I was going to ask you later about why you supported Bernie Sanders but we'll get back to that so yeah I like to talk about that later yeah okay okay so hey I got a question for you also now I'm curious about what how your views developed and what they are now about the issue of women in combat you know when we've opened up the military to female participation and generally speaking it appears that old opening up Avenues of participation to women has immense benefits for women if handled correctly for children certainly on the economic front it doubles the pool of available talent for everyone I know the best predictor of development in the third world is rights accorded to women especially on the economic front so that all looks like a good thing but then you know I have my skepticism about the Practical and ethical utility of placing women on the front lines for example in battle positions and there's obviously a huge disparity in physical strength and probably an innate aggression and you know that could go one way or another because it isn't completely obvious that the most aggressive soldiers are the best even though that might seem self-evident now you you've uh well you've been there so what did you conclude about the the the integration of women into the Armed Forces what's good about that and and what's not good about it assuming there is anything not good about it my my position on this and this is based on my experience is that we should have the best people for the job whatever that job may be the people who are best equipped who are best trained who have the capabilities both you know mental emotional and physical and that women on their face simply for their gender should not be disqualified from various jobs simply because of that I have served alongside obviously many men and women uh people who have been very good at their jobs because of their skills and their capabilities and others who who don't have those skills and capabilities and so whether those jobs are serving as an infantry Soldier or an artillery Soldier whether you're serving in a combat unit or a support unit what I want both as a soldier who I want to be serving alongside but also I think when you look at this from a policy perspective what we should want as a country is we we need the best people who are going to do who are best equipped to do the job not all women are best equipped to serve in a combat unit not all men are best equipped to serve in a combat unit yeah so there should not be um an arbitrary standard simply based on gender but rather set the standard and if you meet the standard whether you're a man or a woman then you want the job go get it I I don't believe so it's pure merit-based evaluation correct or as you're concerned correct I guess that would bring up that brings up two problems I suppose is one is that there are physical standards set for jobs like firefighter and policemen and right and obviously military practitioner Soldier and those standards especially in elite units are extremely high and mean they're high enough so most men can't manage them at all and because of the difference especially in upper body strength women have a lot of stamina but difference in upper body strength really differentiates men from women if the physical standards are set high enough to exclude say 95 percent of men they're they're going to exclude virtually all women and then the question comes up well should you keep the standards and obviously some level of physical uh prowess is necessary but if the standard is 100 exclusionary on the sex front then it raises the question of whether the standard itself is sexist let's say in a counterproductive Manner and so sure I think the question is the question is what is what is the basis for the standard I and I know that there are some standards that have been set traditionally and in the military well this is an elite unit so the standards must must be exclusionary so we only get the most elite people but are those standards simply based on a concept of elitism I guess in this context or are they set based on the conditions that soldiers serving in that particular unit will be likely to face are they based on on the reality of the the requirements of the job and so if we're in a situation and there are jobs both in the military as you mentioned First Responders and others if those standards are set on a realistic assessment of what this job will require and it turns out that hey one out of a hundred women who apply actually qualifies then so be it uh you know whatever if there are a greater number of men who qualify then so be it uh if you have people who get these jobs who cannot do the job then it's pointless and it puts themselves and it puts the entire unit and Mission at risk in doing so [Music] despite the U.S blowing through the 31.4 trillion dollar debt ceiling last month the White House still refuses to reduce spending our national leadership has buried their heads in the sand but you don't have to call the experts at Birch gold today and start diversifying into gold for over 5 000 years gold has withstood inflation geopolitical turmoil and stock market crashes with help from the experts at Birch gold you can own gold and attack sheltered retirement account Birch gold makes it easy to convert an IRA or 401K into an IRA in Precious Metals just text Jordan to 989898 to claim your free info kit on gold and then talk to one of their precious metal Specialists with an A-Plus rating with the Better Business Bureau thousands of happy customers and countless five-star reviews you can trust Birch gold to help protect your savings text Jordan to 989898 today [Music] well there's a measurement science that's been owed it to this for a long time and and there are actually guidelines for psychologists who do assessment let's say in relationship to a particular job some of those are enshrined in appropriate law and then the notion is first of all that you have to do a job analysis which is okay what is it that the people who are doing this job who are good at it spend the bulk of their time doing so you can measure that although that's not easy for example it's not that easy to measure their performance of a middle manager for example in a corporation because the outcomes are difficult to specify but but you can do a better or worse job of that and if you do a good job then you can find out what predicts prowess and you can do that statistically and then you can then you Define merit right Merit is what makes you makes it likely that you will do very well doing whatever this job is for that's Merit and and that can be handled properly the problem is as you alluded to if you accept Merit find in that manner as the gold standard then you're going to have to accept the outcome which is that there isn't going to be radical Equity at all levels of analysis in the candidate pool and so you have to forego that and it certainly seems I would say that on the left side of things now people are almost entirely unwilling to forego that Equity outcome I mean even Kamala Harris who should have known better tweeted out a few weeks ago her support for this concept of equity and people who aren't paying attention think that means the quality of opportunity which is not what it means at all which is why it's a different word it means that if the outcomes of the selection process aren't equal across all conceivable combinations of ethnicity and gender and sex Etc that uh intersectional morass then the system is by definition exclusionary and Prejudiced and that well that just kills that just kills Merit assuming that Merit is not completely equally distributed now one other question on the female front so one of the things that's Disturbed my conscience with regards to women on the front lines is that there's always the possibility that you'll fall into the hands of the enemy and it wasn't very much fun for let's say British and American prisoners of War in Nazi camps in uh World War II although there were some Geneva Convention Arrangements that were still in place but I can't imagine what it would be like to be a front-line woman who fell into enemy hands I mean that's a level of absolute bloody catastrophic hell that I think that that we should be very very cautious about exposing anyone to and so I have a proclivity to think that women are differentially susceptible to exploitation on the captured enemy front and I don't know exactly you know given Credence to what you say about making sure we have the most qualified people you know maybe you can ask people to face their death I don't know if you're if it's okay to ask them to face endless gang rape and then death you know that's pushing the envelope and so I don't know what you think about that I imagine you the thoughts of that sort must have gone through your mind from time to time sure it is it is the most um war war is tragic and ugly to say the least and you're facing some of the most horrific conditions uh which is one of the reasons why I don't support the draft is because as a soldier I don't want to be serving alongside anybody who hasn't made that choice to be there who hasn't made that choice to be willing to make those sacrifices not only to give up one's life in service to our country but to face the plethora of what could be the absolute worst case scenarios um that that that's my perspective and and so whether it's uh those scenarios are facing a male or a female Soldier these are some of the things that you know both the training of of the Practical implications but obviously uh the mental preparation for how anything could possibly go bad is essential before sending troops into that situation okay so your sense it sounds like your sense is that you know if people have been fully apprised of the risks and I think we outlined the most substantive risk on the female side if people are fully apprised of that risk and there's evidence that they actually understand what that means which is no simple matter that it's okay to allow them to make that choice but you that's partly why you introduced the idea that there's no compulsion in military conscription also partly because you don't get the best out of people if they're compelled obviously so okay so so anything else on the combat front or can we turn back to the Democrats I I'd like you to do it well let's I'll I'll walk us back into that because um it it it is what motivated me to run for Congress we talked about you know okay well I've been with the Democratic party for for 20 years I chose to join the Democratic party uh my experience on two Middle East deployments is what really drove me to uh to run for Congress it wasn't something I had great any ambition for frankly uh when I ran for the State House in 2002 but being exposed to the cost of War being exposed to the both the military-industrial complex but what you described very well earlier is this this collusion in the narrative and the push coming from elected officials in Washington the the establishment of people in both political parties who are part of this war-mongering uh una party uh the so much of of I guess the mainstream Media or Legacy Media that we have seen uh you know amp up and beat the drums for war over and over not not interested in actually exposing the truth or asking any tough questions is it kind comes to foreign policy and the decisions to go to war and of course now even more so we're seeing big Tech being a a major contributor in in this establishment narrative it's what drove me to to run for Congress to be able to be in a position where I could um actually serve in a place to help make decisions that would prevent us from continuing to go and wage these costly counterproductive Wars that that actually end up undermining our own countries uh National Security one of the main decisions why I chose one of the main reasons why I chose to lead the Democratic party is because the Democratic party has become the war party those voices that we talked about a little bit on the left who challenged uh the the military-industrial complex challenged this pro-war narrative that we're seeing across the board um I I don't see them anymore and worse yet we have leaders in the Democratic party who are the ones who are actually amping up uh these these counterproductive Wars who are amping up these new cold Wars against Russia and China were amping up and escalating and pushing us to the brink of of nuclear war which is where we sit right now as a nation which which threatens us and and threatens the world frankly and doing so without any thought or consideration for uh the reality of something that was was very eye-opening for us here in Hawaii back in January of 2018 when we had uh we had we had a missile alert where we thought that North Korea was sending a nuclear missile to us and then we had 15 minutes to live the government telling us oh seek shelter immediately this is not a drill missile inbound to Hawaii but we were confronted with the reality that there is no shelter there is literally no place to go to go so not only have our leaders failed Us in the sense of getting us to this point where that is now a reality that every single one of us lives with right now but also they tell us oh seek shelter get inside stay inside there is no shelter they may have some fancy shelters where they may be able to survive and continue to wage war in the event that we get there but the vast majority of people in this country people around the world will be the ones that suffer the catastrophic uh consequences of a nuclear Holocaust there is no shelter they have not provided that shelter and so this question of of how my experience is there on these deployments the experiences that I've had throughout this time uh was one of the main reasons why I left the Democratic party and frankly was one of the main reasons that that uh back in 2016 that I saw the necessity to leave as Vice chair of the DNC to go and speak out against uh Hillary Clinton's warmongering record as she was trying to become our country's commander-in-chief and the dangers of what would happen if that became a reality okay so it was primarily a consequence of concerns about well concerns about the military-industrial complex okay let's segue for a minute then um I made a couple of videos about the Russia Ukraine war you know making a foray into a domain that's obviously contentious enough to produce a war let's say and uh here's my problem um I don't understand now I've listened to a lot of hawks on the American side talk about well two things about the fact that it appears likely this is independent of the merits of this claim it appears likely that the Ukraine supported by the West in the manner it has been supported can do serious damage to Russia's uh conventional arms force and I think there is evidence that the ukrainians and the West are pushing the Russians back and God only knows how far that will go and uh the Hawks that I've talked to said that's a good thing it's in our interest to ensure that Russia is no longer a conventional military threat and no I have a certain degree of Sympathy For That viewpoint but then here's the counter problem is the as I see it so I try to look forward into the future and I think okay what is a victory for the West look like forget about Ukraine Ukraine Victory as they get their territory back and there's a wall between them and the Russia Russians and the pesky Russians leave them alone and they go back to whatever level of appalling corruption they had managed before the war right so that's the Ukraine Victory the West well let's say we could do this two ways Okay so Putin is deposed however that happens and then and then what and then we have a better leader in Russia we have a more trustworthy leader yeah I don't think so the Russians haven't got a great history of that and no matter what you think of Putin it's definitely the case that he isn't the worst leader that emerged in Russia in the last hundred years by any measure so that's a big problem and then I think well instead of Putin being replaced by someone who could be better but probably won't be will have a Russia that's really fragmented and that you know the country in some ways collapses and that's a really bad idea because there's a lot of nuclear bombs there and if you get the fragmentation of that power structure into multiple uh Chieftains let's say and a few of them emerge armed with nuclear bombs then we have a major problem on our hands and that seems to me to be a highly likely outcome and so and then if we weaken Russia severely and permanently then we have the problem of a severely and permanently weakened Russia that's a big problem because they produce a lot of fertilizer and the Europeans happen to be dependent on them for a lot of their energy needs so that doesn't look very wise and then we have the absolute bloody catastrophic probability that if Putin starts to lose in any serious way and so starts to believe that Russian territorial Integrity is threatened however he defines that that he has an immense array of unbelievably powerful Next Generation weapons at its disposal and why the hell wouldn't he use them and so so let's walk through that I mean imagine the West Winds okay what does that mean I don't see what that means I I don't I and I I haven't heard anyone describe to me what the the goal of this war is you know we're supporting the heroic ukrainians it's like yeah you're a you're a moralizing scoundrel that's not a plan that's that's idiot hand waving as bad as the environmental you know doomsayers it's the same thing cheap moral victory make makeup Pro can you make a pro and then a cautionary War case in relationship to the Russia and Ukraine what's in America's True interests as far as you're concerned well well this is this is exactly you have very clearly laid out not only the problem with how this President Biden and frankly uh Democrat and Republican leaders in Congress who are applauding and pushing for and escalating this war is how short-sighted they are but also this has been the problem in U.S foreign policy from our leaders for so long is is they are not actually thinking clearly if they're thinking at all about what is what is our goal what is our objective what you said what does a wind look like how is it defined even theoretically even theoretically yeah whether it's whether it's realistic or not just saying well we're fighting for democracy that's nice not a goal also it's in direct um it's in direct conflict with the reality of their actions even here in the United States about how many undemocratic decisions and increasingly authoritarian decisions they are making but on this question of of the war in in uh what is essentially a proxy war against Russia the United States is waging a proxy war against Russia uh Ukrainian people are paying the price they have not outlined what a win looks like anytime anyone asks President Biden or anyone in the Biden Administration is when does this end how does this end they throw out this this cheap one-liner of saying well well that's up to Putin whenever Putin stops oh good that's good that's up to the guy with the hydrogen bombs exactly that's a brilliant that's bloody brilliant look I know what I would do if I was Putin I know it I know it as soon as I felt that I was in danger of a true loss see I think Putin will settle for the devastation of Ukraine I think he could claim that as a victory the utter Devastation of the Ukraine because it stays out of Western hands but if Putin ever believed that his people even believed that they were now under attack let's say by German tanks let's say the probability that he's used a tactile Tactical Battlefield nuclear weapons seems to me to be extraordinarily high it's like well it is but for me it's like well why wouldn't he and the issue is well you don't want to escalate it's like yeah that's already factored into the decision so there is this Theory I don't know if you've heard it before of escalate to de-escalate and so so the the response from the U.S government is always well we don't think he'll we we don't think he'll resort to that or or uh we don't think that uh you know we're not striving here people say we're not even sure that his nuclear weapons are that great or or will really work in the way that that uh we we think could cause cause major damage but the fact that they're even theorizing about any of this without recognizing the the very direct and real cost to human civilization on this planet is exactly the problem they're living in some fantasy land that it's hard to connect uh it's hard to connect with because it's not based in the reality of the situation you're facing it and you have laid it out very clearly of the different possible outcomes we've heard President Biden say and others uh in the Department of Defense we got to get rid of that guy Putin but not actually for who for who for for who and and to what end to what is the alternative they have no idea who will step up or what kind of Russia will exist in the aftermath of that we can look throughout history to see how U.S foreign policy especially in regime change Wars have failed so spectacularly in different regions around the world because they go and pick which dictator they like or don't like well we'll take this guy out replace him with this guy and then all of these disastrous unintended negative consequences come both for the United States and the people in these countries and and yet here we are now where we are facing that exact same Prospect with the country that has the most nuclear weapons in the entire world right so look at what happened when after the Germans went into France in World War one and wreaked havoc in that idiot War World War One um their their entire Industrial machine was devastated they had a period of hyperinflation they were subject to that extraordinarily punitive Versailles treaty and yes that could be imposed upon them because they were devastated and hypothetically we could do the same thing with Russians if they're beat very badly on the conventional front and they emerge weak and we put punitive measures in place to keep them weak and then we might remember just exactly what happened to Germany as a consequence of the Versailles treaty because they didn't stay weak for long and you know maybe the Russian nuclear weapons are no better than anything else the Soviets built but that doesn't mean a few of them won't go off and it's really not going to take that many because after all they are nuclear weapons and so even one that doesn't work that well is going to be a lot more spectacular than anything that happened in 1945 in Hiroshima we can be absolutely certain of that so again you know the mystery is fair enough man we want Victory okay no problem what's the victory have you ever read the fine print that appears when you start browsing in incognito mode it says that your activity might still be visible to your employer your school or your internet service provider to actually stop people from monitoring your online activity you need expressvpn think about all the times you've used Wi-Fi at a coffee shop hotel or even a friend's house without expressvpn every site you visit can be logged by the Admin of that Network that's still true even when you're in incognito mode expressvpn is an app that encrypts all of your network data and reroutes it through a network of secure servers so that your private online activity stays private expressvpn works on all your devices and is super easy to use the app has one button you tap it to connect and your browsing activity is secure stop letting strangers invade your online privacy by visiting expressvpn.com Jordan that's expr essvpn.com Jordan and get three extra months free expressvpn.com Jordan [Music] one of the common responses that you you hear from both people in the White House from politicians in Washington uh both when talking specifically about Russia but you hear this very often whenever they see there's a there's a bad actor on the world stage well the United States needs to take action to punish them to send them a message and whether this is through economic Warfare or kinetic or tactical uh you know Warfare direct whether indirect or direct this is a line that they have well we have to punish them we have to punish them and so they're making decisions about well we got to make life hard for them punish them in whatever means that we can but not actually thinking about within the context that they should be which is for us in this country what action should we take that is in the best interest for the well-being of the American people in our country International Security and our freedom and who's the them that's the other things punish the Russians it's like well who exactly are you talking about here are you talking about the elites that are in control are you talking about the whole damn population for how long and and as you already pointed out to what end to what end so to what end to what end is all this and well we we touched on that a little bit you can't you can't help but and this is where I suppose I turn into a leftist in some real sense um at least in relationship to what you might describe as a stance against gigantism it's like to what end well how about um military industrial profits that are staggering how about that end and if there's no other end in sight and I'm not particularly skeptical about capitalism except in its gigantism forms it's like if there's no other end being outlined well I'm gonna go with profit as the motive because if you have a better Theory man lay it out but I don't see anything and you know given given that it was Eisenhower who who knew what he was talking about uh having been supreme commander of the Allied Forces when he warned about the military industrial complex being the biggest threat we faced back in what about 1959 that was something to take seriously and it's something to take seriously again so so what do you have any sense and have you talked to anybody who as far as you're concerned has some reasonable Vision about what actually might be done in a sensible manner on the Russia Ukraine front like well the reasonable people who are rooted in reality and not fantasy understand that the only way to bring about an end to this war is through diplomatic means of bringing together the different stakeholders and actually coming to and understanding whether it's through the form of a treaty or whatever that agreement may look like where no one is going to walk away happy but there is uh there is a reasonable approach to being able to find that agreement you'll hear from the Biden Administration anytime this is brought well well zielinski and Ukraine have to be the ones to drive this they're the ones yeah right the terms and everything else the only way that they're able to continue doing what they're doing is through the means that the United States largely the United States but also some other countries in Europe are providing them with the weapons and the money and the ability to do so so the United States has President Biden we could definitely stop lying about we could definitely stop lying about the fact that this is Ukraine yeah exactly nobody in there nobody with any sense at all believes that I mean we're in a proxy war for sure and we have from the beginning and so we might as well be crystal clear about that exactly so hey so Trump popped up the other day as he has a proclivity to do and he said If I Was President I'd stop this war in 24 hours and you know that's typical Trump overstatement I would say but it is the case that the war emerged on Biden's watch and not Trump's watch and that's not nothing and so um what do you make of what do you make of that what do you make of trump when we diagnose the Democrats a bit let's let's turn to the Republicans only Trump only Trump knows uh what what Trump would be doing uh in this situation but as we're talking about a diplomatic end to this war something that should have happened a very long time ago something the Biden Administration has been blocking categorically blocking even efforts between Russian Ukrainian officials on their own who are trying to come together it's been the United States that has been blocking them telling Ukraine no leave the table don't negotiate how have they been blocking do you what are the there are there are multiple reports publicly of of uh Biden Administration officials telling you Craig not to negotiate as well as other countries who have been also sharing that they've been getting that same message going all the way back to I think uh March you know shortly after this war kicked off when they're I heard the same thing I heard that from people I was talking to who knew what they were talking about exactly too that the Russians there were there were Avenues open quite early in the conflict where diplomatic diplomatic maneuvering could have hypothetically proved proved useful and that that was blocked now I'm not saying it would have been useful but I couldn't understand when this all broke out why the number one priority of Western leaders who instead gathered to you know uh make fun of of Putin's hyper masculinity and it was a pretty sad bunch of wimps gathered around the G7 table who were managing that I might say instead of noting that if they had any sense at all they'd be trying to broker something like an intelligent Arrangement so that we didn't face the the likely possibility of being dragged by our shirt sleeve into the maw of the military-industrial complex and end up all torn to shreds as a consequence which I think is the most likely outcome of what's happening now because what I know something about World War one and World War II and one of the and the other Wars we've been in since is the net what tends to happen is you get pulled in one stupid step at a time especially if if you're also turning a blind eye to the Chic chicanery of your wealthy friends who are profiting like Mad on the war front and so people always I think they said you know when World War One started it was like the troops will be home for Christmas it's like yeah I guess that didn't happen and then it's many many years later and it's not like that didn't happen in Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan exactly this will be over soon it's like yes yeah I don't think so that isn't how these things worse work no and and who walked away who walked away with the most prophets in the war in Afghanistan alone majored event major defense contractors what does the Department of Defense have to say about the money that was spent there they can't even account for the vast majority of money that was spent there what can we say we're talking Billy billions of dollars billions or hundreds of billions of dollars yes right hundreds of billions of dollars trillions if I remember correctly overall yes trillions spent on that war especially unaccounted for exactly spent an unaccounted for right so that's pretty damn convenient for whoever for the military industrial complex and and then you have these defense contractors again saying publicly war is good for business period well there's no doubt about that exactly if you're not on the front line work because your bank account isn't that useful to you when you're dead but if you're if someone else is dead and the consequence of that is that your bank account is accruing profits quite nicely well you know that's that's all well and good especially if you're a psychopathic narcissist and it's all about you and that's right and so and there's no shortage of that going around at the highest echelons of of what would you call it fascist collusion and we're seeing that pretty much everywhere yeah so okay so let's turn to the Republicans okay we've we've we've had our shot at the warmongering Democrats let's say um although I think we'll return to their problems but let's look at the Republican side now you're sitting as an independent at the moment that's correct I've got that right yes good um and so you're not aligned with the Republicans or the Democrats which either makes you extremely hard to get along with and someone no one likes or right because that's a possibility yeah or you know or you're in a neutral position in some sense at the moment with a lot of experience on the Democrat front right a lot of detailed experience and so what what do you think is good about the Republicans and what do you think they're lacking well I think there there are a number of Republicans uh who are obviously who are a part of this permanent Washington establishment that whether we're talking about the issue of War and Peace or we're talking about you know the the crony capitalism I'm you know I'm not against capitalism either but you look at the crony capitalism of Industries like uh big farmer the so-called Health Care industry that really doesn't care about people's actual Health uh and well-being you could go kind of across the board of what is wrong with the corruption in permanent Washington where politicians are essentially paid off and therefore working for the interests of these industries rather than the interests of the people that they've been elected to serve and there are both Republicans and Democrats who are not only entrenched in this but who are in those positions because of this this system and and it is what that's outright fascism by by definition right yeah because the fascists the definition of fascism is essentially corporate government collusion at the highest levels and so yeah the Deep state that everyone paranoid is paranoid about and for good reason is essentially a collusionist fascist regime and increasingly an international collusionist fascist regime and when people say crony capitalism you know it's a weak it's a weak phrase for what's essentially a fascist Enterprise so and as you said you know there are people in the Democrat Party and in the Republicans who are pulled into that web of collusion and and it's easy for that to happen too because it is yeah yeah we're sucked into the system quickly and you think well this is just the way it works and so if I want to do anything in Washington if I want to get anywhere even people who people who I know who came in I got elected with best of intentions yeah uh it is very quickly inculcated like within the first few days of being there that this is the way the world Works buddy and if you want to get anywhere to be able to do what you came here to do well this is the game and the rules you've got to play by and then very quickly before you know it uh those those good intentions that you came up with uh are lost and you are no longer serving the interests of the people you are serving you have become a puppet of those who are the Puppet Masters well you are a new fight when you first enter the ring you know even once you're elected I mean in terms of the constituents you represent you're sort of at a pinnacle but as a newbie in Washington you know what you're a little freshman they're literally called freshmen you get elected exactly you work freshman class and you've got known knowledge and you've got no allies and and of and then there's also going to be the part of you that one hangs out Hank wants to hang out with the cool kids exactly and so right absolutely and some of that's actually just humility you know is that because you don't have any allies or friends and you do need to know how the system operates and so that's a big problem so what did you have to be grounded in principles you have to go there and be grounded in your principles and your your mission and your purpose uh which was not just to go and like get along and be around this interesting group of people and get the fancy title though that is some people's purpose but in order to be truly effective there uh you have to go there and be very grounded in your principles and purpose so that you don't then become the puppet for uh these other powerful interests and and that that frankly is exactly what I went through is when I got to Washington you know I was lauded as like oh my gosh she's a rising star the headline she's a rising star of the democratic a party and you know checking all the different boxes of all the things that they look for the labels that they're look for she's a woman of color she's a veteran she's this and she's that and then they realized like oh hold on a second she's not just going to allow us to control her she's not just going to read the talking points that we send out in the morning email she's not just going to vote based on the way that we tell her to do they realize that I did I wasn't there and we and was we was we that was we the DNC essentially I mean my experience with talking to Congressman in Washington is basically it's actually been somewhat it's been disenchanting and I've also developed more Sympathy for the Congress people because well they have hard jobs it isn't obvious that anyone sensible would ever take that job even though it's necessary that they do well the star the the new Congressman they spend 20 to 30 hours a week fundraising they can't do that in their offices they have to rent another office and they spend all their time on their phone so they're basically glorified televangelists or telemarketers um 40 of them don't live in Washington and sleep in their offices so there's no Community there they have to run for reelection every two years which means that not only are they you know in a job that's very difficult as newbies but it's a very unstable job they've destabilized their families by doing so it's hard for them to move their spouse to Washington and then as spent this I think is especially true on the Democrat side but it's also true in the Republican side they're facing constant pressure from the powers that be who are very entrenched to do nothing but raise money for the damn party even though they waste almost all of that and to tow the bloody party line and of course you have to have a certain amount of party discipline or you don't have a party so anyways that's a now so why don't you what what real Temptations did you face and you know how did that warp you because there's no way you get through this without a certain degree of warping and and how did you and and to what degree were you successful in resisting that and and why did you manage it so let's start with that what were the major Temptations facing you when you first went to Washington well like I said within the first few days of arriving there before even being sworn in as a member of Congress uh there was a bifurcation we had we had 84 people who were elected to congress in 2012 new members of Congress uh I believe 50 if the numbers are right I think there were 50 Democrats and 34 Republicans and so for the first week that we were there and what they call freshman orientation we were going through different policy briefings uh with people presenting on you know a whole host of the issues that we Face uh and people presenting from different sides different perspectives um and we all went through that together and then after that it was okay Democrats you're going to go here Republicans you're going to go there and that's where uh two things happened number one is is the the partisan Direction coming to members of Congress basically preaching in a nutshell it is party first you will do what is best for the party first rather than thinking about well what's in the best interest of uh my constituents or what about if I disagree with the party and this is a decision that I want to make you will make your decisions based on what's best for the party if you have an idea to introduce a bill best not to go work with someone from the other party because that'll make them look good or make it harder for us to beat them in the next election so not about how do we solve problems not about how do we be effective in serving our constituents all about the party power keeping power getting it back those are the two things and both of us got those same messages from our respective political party leaders part and parcel of that was exactly what you talked about there was a PowerPoint slide that was put up I remember it very distinctly because it was so shocking about here's what your day will look like and how many hours of the day morning noon and night will be spent either at fundraisers with lobbyists representing different Industries or as you said on the phone off-site making calls to those lobbyists to try to get more of them to come and give you money at the next day's fundraisers breakfast lunch and dinner and as I was looking at this slide it was split up hour by hour here's what your days will look like if you're doing 16 hour days exactly and how the vast majority of a single day was not spent studying issues that you would have to tackle in committee or you know working on a legislation that you're going to introduce the vast majority of hours of that day would be spent fundraising from lobbyists representing special interests and that's the expectation to get on certain committees that you want to get on you've got to give them as you've got to give the party a certain amount of money and all of these different things and and that's the frustration that the American people have with our polit ticks right now and obviously it's been going on for a long time is they know we know this we can see through their results that they don't actually care about making decisions that that are in the best interest of the people are actually solving these problems it's being reactive and ultimately when it comes down to it when you you hear what they are saying the the for example like oh well prescription drug prices are flying through the roof and people can't afford insulin diabetics can't afford insulin you know seniors can't afford the medicine that they need but when you actually look at the results even though politicians complain about it there's not a regulation of big Pharma that would actually seek to start solving some of these problems in the ways that people need help and that's just one example of many we'll be back in one moment first we wanted to give you a sneak peek at Jordan's new documentary logos and literacy I was very much struck by how the translation of the biblical writings jump started the development of literacy across the entire world illiteracy was the norm the pastor's home was the first school and every morning it would begin with singing the Christian faith is a singing religion probably 80 percent of scripture memorization today exists only because of what is sung here we have a Gutenberg Bible printed on the Press of Johann gooper science and religion are opposing forces in the world but historically that has not been the case now the book is available to everyone from Shakespeare to modern education and medicine and science to to civilization itself it is the most influential book in all history and hopefully people can walk away with at least a sense of that you know here's here's maybe part of the underlying problem so I went to the Republican Governors association meeting in November and I remember one of the people who presented they were trying to rally the troops to some degree sharing policy information amongst themselves as Governors and a lot of the Republican Governors are pretty good at implementing um you know micro policies and and there's something to be said for that right to that boots on the ground pragmatic confidence they weren't very good at um putting forward a vision and they weren't really very good at even rallying the fundraisers you know with a rousing call to action and I think that's a problem on the Republican side but one of the presentations was extremely interesting to me as someone interested in measurement because the the person got up and talked about how effective the Republicans had been in certain jurisdictions in certain key elections in outspending the Democrats on the advertising front and I thought I thought three things at the same time the first thing I thought is there is almost no evidence that election spending has any effect whatsoever on the outcome of the election it's a marginal effect on most and so and it's it's so marginal that political scientists have been debating for 20 years about whether or not election spending helps at all whether you're an incumbent or a challenger and so the fact that and then so that's a big problem it's like it is not obvious that what you're paying for works that's a big problem second why in the world did we ever assume that the right metric for electoral uh uh confidence in in running a campaign is how much money you spend no one in their right mind thinks that the right measure for doing a bathroom renovation properly is the fact that it cost a million dollars when it could have cost ten thousand sure that's just Preposterous so it's a so it's a uh you know it's a measurement problem in the fundamental analysis and then even worse on the Republican side and I think I asked this question which didn't make me very popular at the meeting itself which is I don't know if you noticed but 95 percent of the Legacy Media to whom you're devoting all this money actually really can't stand you or anything you stand for and is completely 100 percent tilted against you so on what grounds do you base your claim that spending more money than the Democrats feeding this god-awful Legacy Media machine is well it's not effective and it's counterproductive and they hate you so what are you doing and and so then what happens in Washington it's very similar is the the parties devolve to the simplistic notion that those Junior congressmen who can beat the drum most effectively to raise money are ipso facto the most loyal and competent and that's all based on a whole misapprehension of it's a measurement problem it's like the money you raise is not an indication of your competence it's the same problem we were talking about with relationship to women in the military to begin with what the hell are you measuring now okay you now for whatever reason you go out on a lot of democrat committees and you ended up as Vice chairman you had a pretty stellar career very rapidly accelerating now you claimed that you weren't one of the junior Congress people that could be you know subsumed all that easily into the military-industrial complex for lack of a better word so if that was the case then why in the world were you also able to to move into leadership positions in the Democrat Party because hypothetically you would have had to go along and I'm sure you went along to some degree but you would have to go along that's what they're telling you you have to go along to get something done but you're saying you didn't particularly go along or at least not always and yet you had a stellar career so so how how is that possible these opportunities uh the these you know Vice chair of the DNC we'll start with that one uh because I was I was a top official of the national Democratic party from 2000 I guess I was sworn in January 2013 up until my choice to leave that position in in 2016. um I was sitting in a the back seat of a car shortly it was around the time of of President Obama's uh re-election inauguration I got a phone call saying hey what would your answer be if you were asked to serve as Vice chair of the DNC I had been in office for less than a month and my response to this person who called me was uh I don't know what is a vice chair of the DNC what do they do what what would the expectations be what would uh you know what kinds of things would I be able to do is this just to buy a name thing or would I actually be able to do something I I didn't have any idea what that was but I was offered that position and I thought well hey I agreed to do it because I thought maybe this is an opportunity for me able to be bring some and affect some change the Democratic National party so these a lot of these different things um came came to me without me seeking them out at all why why because of what I talked about they excuse me they saw um they saw the superficial and they thought well this is somebody who we can you know if I did go along I I can imagine I think it would be a safe assumption to say that that they would have continued to push me up into the highest levels if I had been someone who that they thought I was that I would just go along and I could tell the story that they wanted to tell and say the things that they wanted me to say and so when they asked me to be Vice chair of the DNC I had been in office less than a month and who's they who's the they that are asking it is it is it is you know the the Democratic leadership in congress uh Democratic Leadership uh within within the DNC and also I got a lot of media coverage that I I didn't have a press secretary I didn't have a publicist I didn't seek any of this stuff out but I kept getting calls hey we want you on our show we want to feature you in this magazine we want to do this you want to do that and and it I I question it a little bit but ultimately I was like hey look this is an opportunity for me to be able to reach out to people and say what I want to say and get across what I want to get across so I took advantage of those opportunities checked the identity boxes they were hoping that you might be well I want to get back to this issue of they too you know my experience with organizations and activists for that matter is that the they turns out to be a very small number of people who are very well connected who are continually maneuvering and sometimes that's a consequence of their unbelievable competence and sometimes it's a consequence of their unbelievable capacity to manipulate and and uh capitalize on narcissism and that's a probably a problem in politics and entertainment and media more than anywhere else for obvious reasons um and I don't want to paint everyone with the same brush because that's that's foolish but that they that are looking at you and thinking well you know we can certainly look use someone with an image like hers for us and that's not all cynical by the way um who who are the who are the people who are making those decisions as far as you are concerned if we go back say well when you were asked to serve as Vice chairman who are making those who is making those decisions well I mean obviously Nancy Pelosi is one of them uh you know Debbie Wasserman Schultz was the the head of the the DMC at the time uh there were people in the Obama Administration uh there are people who uh were not elected officials and and within the DNC I'm sure there were probably political donors as well who had a part a part of that but but you know we'll start with Nancy Pelosi I had won my primary election here in Hawaii uh in August of 2012 and um that in Hawaii Hawaii is a very strong Democratic state that was essentially the election I did have a republican opponent and still had to go and win the general election but it was a safe assumption that I was going to I had de facto already won uh the election and within a few weeks of winning that election I had gotten a call from Nancy Pelosi saying would you like to come and speak during prime time at the Democratic National Convention that was going to happen uh shortly shortly after that this was in Charlotte North Carolina in 2012. someone who had not even yet been elected to congress for the first time being invited to speech it was I was surprised I was very surprised uh the topic she was asking me to talk about is one that is obviously near and dear to my heart to talk about veterans and uh and so I said yes of course I will do that I went there and I spoke and I did interviews with just about every media channel that was out there and but but all of these different things uh you know there were not opportunities that that were given uh to to the vast majority of people I guess I'll put it that way yeah but my decision my decision uh to leave as Vice chair of the DNC was one of those pivotal moments where in the lead-up to making that decision it was it was driven by a couple of things one was the recognition of their the rules of the DNC is that you're you're as an officer of the DNC you are not involved in uh tilting the scales or getting involved in democratic primaries especially Democratic presidential primaries that you have different candidates they go out they make their case and then the party coalesces around whoever the winner of that primary is well in the lead up to that 2016 primary election I started to see very quickly that the decisions that were being made not in consultation with us as Vice chairs of the DNC but unilaterally by W Wasserman Schultz who was the chair who was very close with Hillary Clinton were made to give an advantage to Hillary Clinton for example limiting the number of debates where she would have to face Bernie Sanders uh putting them at times where you know I think there was one that was scheduled during like the Super Bowl or something like that when nobody was going to be watching or paying attention to a presidential uh debate there were there were con newly implemented rules that said any Democratic presidential candidate that participates in a debate that is not sanctioned by the DNC will will be banned from participating in any future DNC debate and and for me I'm just thinking like if our if our purpose and our cause is to increase involvement and engagement in our democracy to get more people to pay attention to learn more about these different candidates to actually have a real dialogue about these important issues why would you be punishing someone for going out and trying to engage in doing exactly that why would you be trying to limit the debate that the American people can be exposed to and involved with and it was very clear why those decisions were made to give an advantage to Hillary Clinton who was designated as the one that the Democratic Party powers that be wanted to win that election and so their lack of Integrity uh coupled with the fact that Hillary Clinton wanted to be our commander in chief I still serve in the Army Reserves now for almost 20 years so for me as someone serving in the reserves at the time as well as a member of Congress as well as an American to have her in a position where both Democrats and the mainstream media refused to challenge her on her record both as a senator in every position she had held previous Secretary of State and so forth previously on on her she is she is the queen of Warhawk she is the queen of war mongers no one challenged her they just said well she's got all these positions she's the most qualified I and so many of my brothers and sisters in uniform were like hold on a second you need to ask her and hold her to account for the concept disastrous consequences for the decisions that she has made the wars that she has advocated for the things that she has done that has not only undermined our national security but come at Great cost to the men and women who volunteers why do you think okay two questions on the Hillary front I mean one of the reasons she terrified me I suppose is that it was pretty damn obvious that she's been aiming at the presidency for 50 years sure and that's a long time right and you've got to ask yourself what is driving someone who's that committed to that goal like and the goal is clearly the presidency it's not what could be done with the presidency and it's not like she was dragged in Kicking and Screaming by people who were overwhelmingly impressed by her prowess and who you know enjoined upon her for moral reasons to consider a career in government it's like no no she's being laser focused on being the first female president of the United States for God only knows how long and so that that's concerning to me but then but then that doesn't answer the next or address the next mystery which is well given that she's a Democrat and given that the Democrats should in principle be somewhat skeptical let's say of the a fascist collusion between Corporation and government and a little bit skeptical on the military industrial side why do you think that her record indicates that she's such a hawk on the military front like is that a compensation is she attempting this is a cheap you know psychological interpretation could easily be wrong is she trying to look tough on the on the foreign policy front to you know to mitigate against any criticism of the fact that she might not be capable of that or what's going on why is she doing that I don't think that's such a cheap uh analysis or or assumption to make because that that that is a reality and that is one of my fears not only about her but also about some others who have been in those uh types of position uh you look at someone like Kamala Harris for example she's a breath away from the presidency and I I have lost yes unfortunately yes exactly which is incredibly concerning I I have lost track of how many uh service member American Service members I have spoken with who are absolutely terrified uh about the prospect of a president Harris for that reason she's she's you mean facing off against someone like Vladimir Putin for example wouldn't that be lovely Kamala Harris versus Vladimir Putin oh yeah or or anyone but somebody like her uh who is weak who lacks understanding in foreign policy who feels the need to prove herself to prove her strength to to stand up with the big boys and look tough and somehow believe that well hey the best way to do that is to go drop some bombs somewhere and start a war uh this this is uh a terrifying Prospect uh for someone and and you see this yes with with some women who feel like they have to go and look tough but that only happens if they're not actually strong internally strong individuals themselves but we also see with see this with some of the the male uh leaders in this country we saw how you know um how people react again like in the media and in media how the media and politics how they react uh when we go to war we saw how Nancy Pelosi and Brian Williams and others declared Donald Trump this is the first time he seems presidential when he decided to go and launch some rockets and missiles against Syria people who hated him people who could not stand him and were obsessed with trying to destroy president Trump all of a sudden he goes and launches some bombs and they're all over the television saying well finally he's acting like a president give me a break this is the problem with the lack of leadership that we have and how you you know you started this question asking how is it the Democratic party that should be the party that is at a minimum skeptical and cynical about the military-industrial complex and going out and starting new Wars and regime change and all of this stuff well they have become party to it part and parcel of it and have become that machine that benefits from all of this and so they can't it would be self-defeating for them to now exercise skepticism or Challenge and this you know I wanna I wanna jump back to a question you asked earlier we didn't get to finish which was what are some of the positive things that I'm seeing in the in the Republican party right now we see at a minimum there are dissenting voices within the Republican party for example on the issue of this proxy war against Russia there are not enough to be able to make a legislative change at this point I hope that changes but there are a growing number of Republicans who are saying no expressing a lot of the concerns that we are and from a Republican party perspective there's no I'm not aware of any punitive measures being taken against those members so even though they are not part of the establishment in the Republican Party um there is that room for Dissent there is and I've experienced this myself there's that room for open conversation and dialogue whether you agree or disagree there's a growing movement of concern about you know these wars and a movement for peace and response a responsible foreign policy whereas the Democratic party has moved in the opposite direction where you are not allowed to ask questions you are not allowed to challenge their narrative or their position you are not allowed to hold a dissenting view uh because if you do then they will seek to destroy you and cancel you and smear you and and take away away your voice and it's it's really sad and unfortunate because there's nothing more undemocratic than that right right well look I would love to continue talking to you on the YouTube platform um but we're I know you have a heart out in about half an hour and I would have really liked to have talked to you some more about trouble we should do this again we should do this again and we'll find it we'll find a time that's appropriate and do it again but wonderful um I would just uh I just ask you one final question on this uh um in this episode then for everyone watching and listening I'm going to continue talking to Tulsi gabbard on The Daily wire plus platform I'm going to do a little bit more biographical interrogation let's say and uh that'll be available for those of you who want to go over to the Daily wire plus side of the world let's say and uh but but I'll maybe we could close with this so what do you what what are your future plans at the moment where do you see yourself going because you're in an odd political position at the moment to say the least you have this immense wealth of experience and and and uh reputation hard earned and and and you're in a um idiosyncratic position and you're quite young as well all things considered by political standards and so what what where do you foresee yourself going and where would you like to go and and in in the in the in the in the next few years and maybe even longer than that uh I will the short answer is is I don't exactly know specifically but what I do know is that I will continue to do what I've done uh throughout throughout my life which is seek out those uh opportunities and places where I feel I can make the most positive impact and be of service uh be of service to God be of service to to our country and the American people I always like talking to you Americans you're so good at that sort of thing you know that whole Mr Smith Goes to Washington thing which is well it's real you know it is real it is real and I've seen that among uh Democrats and Republicans alike you know there is despite everything that divides people in the United States um and despite you know all the possibility of corruption and all of that there is still this underlying belief in the goodness of essential goodness of the system and this real desire on behalf of people to to be of genuine service and to put themselves on the line for it it's no joke to give up your life to to become a congressman or congresswoman it's very very tough decision and we need we need leadership I think I think the thing that just to close out uh that that point here is um there is promise in this system but the system is extremely dysfunctional and corrupt right now and so whether it's what I'm doing now and being able to speak the truth and try to bring some common sense and reality and Sanity to the insanity that we are going through in this country that is threatening our constitutional rights that is threatening our our own democracy I will continue to seek ways to be uh to help lead that change to get us back to the kind of country that our Founders envisioned for us well that's a very good closing and so we will turn now to to the to the Daily wire plus part of this uh all right conversation thank you very much for talking to me today thank you I look forward I look forward to part two yeah yeah that would be good and so and so for all of you watching and listening thank you very much for your time and attention it's much appreciated and to the Daily wire plus people who are producing this the film crew that's here in Detroit because that's where I am today thank you for your help and uh onward and upward to the next part of the conversation very good to meet you hello everyone I would encourage you to continue listening to my conversation with my guest on dailywireplus.com

Channel: Jordan B Peterson

Views: 2,821,427

Keywords: Jordan Peterson, Jordan B Peterson, psychology, psychoanalysis, existentialism, maps of meaning, free speech, freedom of speech, personality lectures, personality and transformations, Jordan perterson, Dr Peterson

Id: 5N0vQ4Tq3ew

Length: 84min 24sec (5064 seconds)

Published: Thu Feb 16 2023

Reddit Comments

[u/plsobeytrafficlights]

I know things have taken a strange, and dark turn for you tulsi, but Jesus…why?? Gross. This was just gross. What were you thinking?

[u/splodgenessabounds]

I watched the whole thing and I must say Tulsi came off the better: she ignored Peterson's repeated Russia-baiting (he's either pig-ignorant about modern Russia or he's a pro-war arsehole). It's up to her whose podcasts she agrees to appear on: IMO Peterson isn't worth bothering with, but who am I to argue.