Beneath the Sea

Dennis Prager here. Thanks for listening to the Daily Dennis Prager Podcast. To hear the entire 3 hours of my radio show commercial-free every single day, become a member of Prager Utopia. You'll also get access to 15 years' worth of archives as well as the daily show prep. Subscribe at pragerutopia.com. Hello everybody. I'm Dennis Prager. There's no news that I am aware of out of the Atlantic and the poor souls in that mini submarine. You know, you really wrestle with the following if you speak publicly and It's one thing to think something, and it's one thing to say something publicly. That itself is an extremely important distinction— what people say privately and what they say publicly. Since we live in the age of foolishness, people don't make that distinction. But my topic at this very moment is, do you say to people that it does appear to be hopeless. And I even ask myself another question: why say it? To which I have an answer. People listen to any public figure because they want to know what that person thinks. Why else would you listen to me or anybody else? If indeed they, they have died, my, my immediate reaction is I pray that the submarine simply imploded at some point and they had a very swift death. There are so many fates worse than death, as we all know, and the claustrophobic submarine And its hypothermia and its gradual depletion of oxygen is a terrible way to spend your last days on Earth. There will be many— if indeed they are gone— there will be many post-mortem autopsies, so to speak. And there should be. Why did these people die? Was it a foolish risk on their part? And I don't see this as a criticism of them. I don't think any of them thought it was a particularly risky venture. I think that people who climb Everest, for example, are aware of the danger of climbing and then coming down from Everest, much more aware of that danger than I believe these people were aware of any danger that one could ascribe to the submarine. Then the other autopsy reports will concern the submarine itself, which I keep reading had repeated problems And who knows? Are there any lessons to be learned? I don't know yet. I don't know if there are lessons to be learned. You can't learn the lesson never take risks. A safe life, completely safe life, is not a life you want to aspire to. On one's tombstone, one does not want written, "He or she," or I guess some will have "Zee," "took no risks." So, what I have heard from the, or about the CEO of the firm is not not been particularly impressive, wherein he spoke about his desire to have a, a young person and not an old white person steer the ship. That's an amazing thing. He's white. The participants, to the best of my knowledge, were white. This, this obsession with not having whites— if that is not racism, A, then there's no such thing as racism, and B, it's, it's truly, it's an immoral doctrine. Well, I'll keep you apprised of any developments should, should I become aware of any. Sean, do you have that audio that I sent you? Okay. There was a conference that just concluded. Did you know of it, right? Beyond Growth. Now, were you familiar with it before? Was it Brownstone made us aware of it? Is it Brownstone, the name? What was the name of the, uh, the— it's with stone in it, the great, great website. Yeah, it is Brownstone. Were you aware of that conference prior to Brownstone's report? So my, my friends, I don't have a lot of time to watch any one thing on the internet, but I I spent well over an hour, and that did not cover the entire day's proceedings of a conference in Europe. Very fancy hall and well done. It almost looked like the European Parliament of a group of a gigantic— well, I take that back— of a large group. I don't know how large. Called Beyond Growth. I want you to understand something that is taking place in the world today. There is an increasingly large movement. The head of the European Trade Union Commission, or whatever it's called, was there. Did you see that? I mean, yeah, I watched it. I mean, this is not— and the man running it is a member of the European Parliament. He's a Green, needless to say. I want you to understand how sick the green movement is and how, uh, what a mortal threat they pose to civilization as we know it. By the way, they would acknowledge that we want to pose a mortal threat to civilization as we know it. Now I want you to understand once again the name of the conference is beyond growth. Their position, their position is that we should not aspire to economic growth. The Earth cannot afford it, and it is a bad idea and should never have been adopted. We need no growth. This is— you hear me? This is the position now of the green movement, at least in Europe. No growth, and indeed negative growth. Speaker after speaker spoke about the importance of people to live a full life must not aspire to economic growth either for themselves or for their society. This was the sickest large conference I had ever been attuned to. Sick. Overwhelmingly young people and disproportionately female. In fact, the man who ran the conference, the member of the European Parliament who was a French man, Dennis Prager spoke about how it is the whole movement is— the whole climate change movement is spearheaded by women. He lamented the fact that men were not more involved. For those of you who think that there is invalidity, if you will, to my position that women, young women in particular, but women generally are playing a disproportionate role in harming our civilization, beginning with the harm done to children and the transition abuse of children. Do you know, now it is, it is weekly, and sometimes more than once a week, that I read a major story of a young person who so desperately wishes they had never usually a she. She had never transitioned. And every single one says how they were subtly or not so subtly pressured by psychologists, psychiatrists, and pediatricians into transitioning. Something you cannot, of course, do. You cannot become a male if you're a female. Do you understand that? Well, the odds are you do understand it, unless you're on the left. Liberals understand that, and conservatives understand that. You hit— so the conference is against economic growth. Then people could lead a full life. The emptiness that has been produced in vast numbers of European and American young people The, the vapidness of thought, the emptiness in their souls. This is a counter-religion. Hi folks, I'm delighted to announce my next listener cruise with the good people, quality people of Coastline Travel. England, Iceland, Greenland— yes, Greenland— June 24th to July 5th, 2024. We'll be sailing on the Regent Seven Seas, one of the most beautiful luxurious ships I have ever seen, the Seven Seas Splendor, with white glove service, spacious rooms, superb cuisine. Regent is a 5-star luxury line and all-inclusive. That means business class airfare included, 1-night pre-hotel in London, shore excursions, unlimited beverages, gratuities, and of course special events with me, all covered in the cost. We'll visit spectacular places in Iceland, a port in Scotland, the Faroe Islands, and 3 ports in Greenland. But the best reason to travel is the fellow listeners you'll meet. On my trip. They always sell out fast. Click the banner at DennisPrager.com or email PragerListeners@CoastlineTravel.com. Again, the banner on my website or send an email to PragerListeners@CoastlineTravel.com. I have a new motto: if you don't fight, don't complain. It's a good motto. Why didn't I think of that earlier? Or no, I think— should I say, if you don't fight Don't complain, or if you don't fight, you can't complain. Which is better? You prefer the first one. All right, since you're the only person I asked, we'll go with that. I was mesmerized by this conference in Europe, the No Growth Conference. They actually are appealing— Beyond Growth, sorry, thank you. Beyond Growth, that's right. Beyond Growth. And I realized I can add it. I wrote a— I can add it to my list that I wrote up a few months ago, just some of the truly absurd, truly absurd things that people say today, like men menstruate, men give birth, sex is not binary. America is systemically racist. The— we live in a world of such enormous lies that it is absolutely true that anything repeated, no matter how much the absurdity and no matter how much falsity, vast numbers of people will believe it. People have been taught for at least half a century not to think, but to just imbibe what they read and what quote-unquote the experts tell them, like lockdown, like put a mask on your 2-year-old, like close schools. Now you can add, it is as sick as men give birth that we should not aspire to economically grow. You have to understand this is a major theme now on the left and among greens. Send me the Brownstone report on it, okay? Then I'll be able to read a summary, more summary than even what I have said. And I watched it. I mean, I watched much of it, let's put it that way. It is, it It is like attending a religious convention. They sang, they chanted, they banged, they clapped. Well, of course, clapping happens at any meeting, but they're this— they sound so sweet and sophisticated. We don't want to grow, we want to flourish. I want you to understand that the great majority of what I heard at this International Green Conference meant nothing. I did not understand it because it was not understandable. They don't understand what they're saying. And when I get this excerpt for you to hear, you will understand how sick the Greens are in this world. But it sounds great. Save the planet. People don't understand the sickness underlying this worship of the planet and the denigration of humans. They don't want you to be better off than you are. You will be— oh, I take that back. They don't want you to be economically better off. You will be better off though if we slow down and go into negative growth. Do you understand that? How is that possible? How do we pay for hospitals if there is less money to be used? And the answer that they gave is no austerity. I really listened. No austerity, you get that? So we should go into further debt but have no economic growth. And what is their answer? More taxes. Because the rich don't pay their fair share. But if the rich were taxed to the tune of all of their income, a 100% tax, it wouldn't solve the problems that they raise or that they are addressing. We are truly living in the age of the lie, and it's a very scary thing to be beyond growth. This is the way they describe it. Actually, it's a month ago. I just became aware of it. The purpose of this plenary session is to provide concrete recommendations in order to shift the European economy towards a new post-growth model. Aiming to flourish rather than to grow. You will flourish without growing. Really, you will do better if everyone has less money and the economy of your country does not grow. It is up there with men give birth. And it is led largely by women, and they acknowledge that. They're proud of it. So here was the last speaker, a young woman from Belgium, Anouna De Wever. And that's Anouna, A-U-N-A, A-U-A-N-U-N-A, D-E, Wever, or Wever, I should say, W-E-V-E-R. She is identified as a climate and social justice activist. She's a social justice activist. What you are about to hear, you could imagine how long I had to listen. What, what is the time, time marker on that that I sent you, Sean? 1 hour? Yeah, it's at the 1 hour 32 minute and 50 second mark. She was the final speaker. Here, here she is.

I'm going to say something that is unfortunately controversial to this institution, but it really shouldn't be. If we move beyond growth, we have to acknowledge what lays below our growth: white supremacy, colonialism, and imperialism.

Okay. Now let's hear the whole applause.

And I, I really want to say—

Now you understand, now you understand David Horowitz's brilliant observation 30 years ago: environmentalism is a watermelon, green on the outside and red on the inside. Side. Back in a moment. Just when you thought it couldn't get any better, Mike Lindell with MyPillow is launching the MyPillow 2.0. When Mike invented MyPillow, it had everything you could ever want in a pillow. Now, nearly 20 years later, he discovered a new technology that makes it even better. The MyPillow 2.0 has the patented adjustable fill of the original MyPillow, and now with a brand new fabric that is made with a temperature-regulating thread. The MyPillow 2.0 is the softest, smoothest, and coolest pillow you'll ever own. For my listeners, the MyPillow 2.0 is buy one, get one free offer with promo code PRAGER. MyPillow 2.0 temperature-regulating technology is 100% made in the USA and comes with a 10-year warranty and a 60-day money-back guarantee. Just go to mypillow.com and click on the radio listeners square To the buy one, get one free offer, enter promo code Prager or call 800-761-6302 to get your MyPillow 2.0 now. I'm gonna have to check to see if the media reported the Beyond Growth conference, one of the most frightening, sick conclaves that I have witnessed. But the media is now the issue, as I turn to Ashley Rinsberg, who is an investigative journalist and presents this week's PragerU video titled "Russia Collusion and the Death of Journalism." Here is the beginning of his video to set the stage for you.

Journalism, the mainstream media, is dead. It wasn't killed by competition from the internet. It committed suicide. We know the approximate date of its demise: 2016. We know the cause: the abandonment of objectivity. We even know the method of the suicide: the full participation in a conspiracy to destroy a political candidate and then ultimately his presidency. This is not only my judgment.

Oh yes.

Judgment of the most prestigious public—

We'll stop it here because it's riveting and it'll be hard to actually stop it later. And as you know, I have covered this often. The most prestigious journalism review, which doesn't mean anything because most prestigious institutions in this country are corrupt morally. Intellectually and in terms of truth. But to our shock, the Columbia Journalism Review spoke about how the media simply lied about the Russian collusion, the alleged Russian collusion of the Trump campaign. It was a lie. Ashley Rinsberg is now on with me. So Ashley, I have this philosophical question that I've never fully answered for myself. So I'll begin with this: did the New York Times know it was lying?

Um, at some point I think they knew that they were, they were wrong, and that we saw that from Jeff Gerth's reporting in, in the Columbia Journalism Review. They ran stories they were unsure about that they thought were not worthy of their so-called standards They ran them anyway because the point wasn't the facts, the point was the narrative.

So I know this may sound odd to you, but I think about moral issues all the time. If we hooked up 5 New York Times editors to lie detector machines and assume that they're largely accurate, would they have failed or passed the lie detector test? Did Donald Trump and his campaign collude with Russia? Well, they—

I think at the end of the day, the honest ones would, would, would fail, ironically. And the ones who are lying to themselves because it's politically convenient would pass. And I think there are those true believers who would, who would not just present this to the public, but convince themselves of it despite any evidence. Because, again, the point was never to investigate. It was never to look into this. It was to prove it at all costs. And I do think that meant for some of them to prove it to themselves, whereas for others, I think they realize what happened and what transpired. And to those who are so-called honest, I actually don't think it matters to them that much. I think it was mission accomplished because they essentially managed to at least hamper Trump's reelection and certainly his presidency.

So this was my long-term belief. If you do believe that Donald Trump is a fascist, which they say, which they have said repeatedly, aren't you morally bound to lie and cheat to prevent him from being president? Isn't that a way to justify to oneself lying?

Yeah, it's a resistance, right? It's like a partisan resistance like we saw during World War II against the Nazis and the Italians where, you know, you do anything, you do whatever it takes. And we saw that, we saw the Times, we saw other newspapers literally doing that when they openly and explicitly decided to abandon objectivity. They literally, Jim Rutenberg, the Times, he's their media columnist. He wrote a column where he asks the question, this is a quote, Do normal standards apply, meaning during the Trump presidency? And if they don't, what should take their place? And we found out what should take their place, which is, which is something that's even beyond activism.

That's right. You know, I forgot that. Wasn't that a justification for lying? Isn't that what he wrote?

Yeah, he wrote it. He wrote the column. The title of the column was The Challenges Trump Poses to Objectivity. Where I'm not sure it was Trump posing that challenge.

No, no, that's really important that my listeners hear that because I forgot that. I remember it only from the time. By the way, it's an issue. We have to remember all these things. I'll be back with you in a moment. Ashley Rinsberg, who does incredibly important work about the media. Ashley Rinsberg. Been devoting his life to reporting on the reporters. I hope he has some endorphin producers in his life. I can't think of a more depressing line of work than reporting on the Western media today. The latest PragerU video is in fact given by him, Russia Collusion and the Death of Journalism. So I asked you, Ashley, Do these people believe what they're doing? Are you familiar with David Brooks, the columnist at the New York Times?

Yes, definitely.

So David Brooks comes from theoretically a conservative background, though he is now a Biden supporter. Yeah. And it's depressing to watch his metamorphosis, actually. But it is what it is, and now he's been a columnist for decades with them. So is he troubled by the fact that the New York Times has not reported the Columbia Journalism Review report? Is he troubled by the report itself? And question number 3, I know you're reading his mind, I fully acknowledge that. Do you think he's even aware of the Columbia Journalism review report?

My guess is that he's not overly troubled by it. My guess is that, you know, like most people, he's got a very strong ability to rationalize things that don't suit his interests, especially people who are part of such a powerful elite establishment. It doesn't really serve them to analyze the failures and certainly not to publicize them. Even though that's what is required in a democracy, as we all know. So I don't think he's terribly bothered. I don't think he's calling for anyone to cover this, not that I've seen. He's got a big enough platform on Twitter that he could have done that even on his own, but he hasn't done it to my knowledge. So I think it's business as usual, my guess.

So if you were in a public forum and somebody were able to actually pose a question 'Are you troubled by the report?' He would say, 'No, I'm not.' Correct? That's your suspicion.

He would say something like, you know, 'I think I heard about it. I heard about that piece. It rings a bell. I'm not entirely sure, but let me just say something like, you know, it was a difficult period. It was fraught. There was a lot going on. We had a president who seemed to be embracing ideologically questionable tendencies, and the media was just doing its best. And some of it, it got right, and some of it, it didn't get so right. I think that's the kind of equivocation that we see. We're seeing it right now with COVID stuff. We're seeing it, of course, with the— well, we're not even seeing equivocation with the Trump stuff, that there's still, um, there's still raring to go.

Why don't you briefly summarize the equivocation with regard to the coronavirus?

Well, we have now the New York Times actually yesterday and today with both an article and an op-ed saying, the op-ed saying we need more information from the government about where this virus came from. And the article saying we may not never know where it came from. The reality is that we are actually figuring it out and it's with no thanks to the New York Times. The New York Times from the earliest days of the pandemic, called it a conspiracy theory to think that this came from the lab in Wuhan that is the largest bat-borne collection of bat-borne coronaviruses in the world. They called it a conspiracy theory from day one before there was a shred of evidence, before Donald Trump had said a word about it. And they kept on doing that for months and months and months until this tide finally turned. And now they're kind of saying, well, we didn't really know, we still don't know, and we're never gonna know. And my responses to it is to say, but it's your job to investigate that question, and it always was. You people who have a 1,000-person newsroom.

All right, so Ashley, I understand, and all my listeners do, what's in it for the New York Times to equivocate about Trump. They hate him, a hatred that is irrational, but they hate him.

Yeah.

Yeah. What, what is in it for them to lie about the origins of COVID I think they were invested in that from the very get-go because they got—

my suspicion, my intuition, given how this went down, is they got the marching orders from pretty much Fauci and co., but mostly from Fauci, who had a very, very tight relationship with their top COVID reporters Carl Zimmer and Donald McNeil. These are buddies, these are friends. Donald McNeil was their top COVID reporter until he was fired for separate things. He was writing to Fauci saying, I just bought two bobbleheads of you, one so I can give it to a friend. I mean, this is a reporter speaking to a government, a government subject of his reporting during the most important period of reporting in his last 50, 60 years. So I think they got their orders. I think they got the the talking points of what was meant to be said. They said it, they stuck with it. It served them because they get great access to Fauci and to other sources in government. And after they had gone all in on this and this became sort of an establishment narrative that COVID could not have come from that lab and only could have come from a market or from an animal, there was no going back. There was no turning back. There was no, there was no, no room for honesty. No room for introspection.

It's mind-boggling. Final question to you. You live in Britain, correct?

At the moment, I'm here.

Yeah. Is the BBC any better?

I don't, I don't really know. I don't watch it too much. I know that The Guardian, which is sort of like an equivalent newspaper, is, is terribly, terribly biased. I wrote an article about The Guardian's The Guardian did this big podcast about slavery and its own ties to slavery, and I wrote an article about it saying that it was basically founded by a slave, someone who was benefiting from the slave trade. And they go on and on and on about equality and colonialism, and this is a company that owes its existence to slavery. So I think this is where, where we are with the media in general. BBC, New York Times, whatever else, right?

Well, you're doing truly significant work. Ashley Rinsberg, thank you. And watch his video, folks, up at PragerU. All right, everybody, Dennis Prager here. A rare guest in studio. She lives in Kazakhstan and we brought her in. All right, she doesn't live in Kazakhstan. She lives a few miles away. Peachy Keenan is her pseudonym, like George Orwell was Eric Blair's pseudonym. And that's fine by me. I love the name Peachy Keenan. It is a really fine choice. I had her on a few weeks ago because of this terrific piece that she had written about the prosecution of the man who helped out people on the subway who were being threatened and truly threatened by this homeless sick man who had been let out of prison so many times, and now he's being prosecuted. So was it you who made the point, we're rewarding men for not being men?

Yeah, exactly.

That was so— that was so terrific. That has stayed with me as one of the important points of our time. Act like a man and we'll prosecute you. Act like a wimp and you'll do fine.

That's right. It's like a threat to other men, to warning them, don't stand up, don't protect women and children. You know, we're kind of raising a, you know, breeding in a generation of cowards.

It's really sad, to say the least. So her book, I did not even know what time, but it just came out. Domestic Extremist, great title, by the way.

Thank you.

A Practical Guide to Winning the Culture War. But it's specifically a guide for men and women, and even more particularly for women, correct?

That's right, yes.

So you, you are, if you will, this is sort of the anti-feminist manifesto.

Exactly. I love that. And I don't even live in a cabin in the woods. I wrote a manifesto. It's about, it's a way for, it's basically, you know, what happened? How did women get here? That's the first half of the book. What they took from us, you know, basically everything. And then second half is how we get it back. How we kind of return to sort of a sense of, you know, being normal is okay for a woman. Stay a woman, get married, try to have a family, stay home with your young children. You're not allowed to say those things anymore. Those things are now taboo. Thanks to feminism.

So I'm going to ask you a question you probably have not been asked, so you're sort of being put on the spot.

That's okay.

But I, I have said and even written that women are now playing a disproportionate role in hurting society. Overwhelmingly, it is women teaching in elementary schools. I mean, overwhelmingly. About 3/4, and at the younger grades, 85%, 95% of the librarians, where so much of the rot is taking place, like drag queen story hour. What is your explanation for this?

Yeah, it does seem like feminism has successfully beguiled all the women to sort of like be their minions, and they're the ones, they're the mothers who are putting their children through The transgender machine, you know, what has gone wrong with women? Um, we need women to save society. I mean, I think that just feminism has created a situation where you basically need to claim all these virtue points. You need to find your, your, your true worth is by being a loyal member of the sisterhood. And if you break out of that, like I did, you get a lot of backlash. You get a lot of hate. It's much harder for you to kind of live your life in mainstream society. There's no reward for a woman who doesn't go along with the crowd, who breaks away from her like college girlfriends, who decides to quit her job to stay home with her newborn, to nurse her newborn, to keep the baby out of daycare. There's no reward for that. There's no societal value put on that. You're just now an outcast, basically. You've committed treason.

So how do you answer their claim? Well, we have no choice. That sounds great if you can afford it.

Right. I mean, that is a real issue. And I did address it at the end of the book. I mean, we have, you know, Elizabeth Warren at one point wrote a, wrote a great book. She was an anti-feminist. She wrote a book, The Two-Income Trap, you know, how the economy is structured to really, you know, make it almost impossible for a family to survive on one income and have a family. Tucker Carlson has talked about this eloquently, and it is a real problem. And it does feel like all these policies have been put in place and designed to make that, to living like a, you know, what they call a trad wife, which is basically a stay-at-home mom. Stay-at-home mom, at least for those first few years. That's been made totally impossible, and it feels like it's by design. But I mean, I know a lot of women who have a lot of kids, 6, 7, or more kids, and they, they may— they have a huge— it's a huge financial sacrifice, but like, it's one that they— there's no other choice for them. Like, there was no choice for me to leave my, my job. I worked at a huge entertainment company. I was totally in the closet as a conservative, and I got pregnant with my 5th baby, and I was like, Sayonara. Like there was just no way, you know, for me, I would never have left my baby. And, um, I would see young women come back after having a baby without their 6-week-old. So I'd be like, well, where's your baby? Oh, he's at school. You know, it's just sad. And I, I'm just, I'm glad that I, I was willing to take, to make the sacrifice. And I think a lot of people just aren't willing. It's a financial sacrifice. And also you get blackballed, you know, by your friends.

When you say by your friends, that interests me because it would seem that a person like you, your friends would be kindred spirits. They'd be supportive.

Let me, let me clarify. My, my old friends, my liberal friends, my colleagues at work who were 100% far-left feminists. I have new friends now, Dennis, and they'll listen to you.

Well, that I, I, maybe I shouldn't say it, but it makes sense.

Yeah, yeah, I found new friends.

What, what turned off the old friends?

I think right around the time I had my third child, you know, they all had two. Of course, that's like the legal, legally mandated limit in Los Angeles for, for children, because that— I mean, you can't fit three car seats in the back of a Tesla, right? So I think once I had my third It was like, you know, uh-oh, she's like off the reservation. She's, you know, breaking some rules. I had another one. I kept going. And then when I converted to Catholicism, that really marked me. And I mean real Catholicism. We go to Mass every Sunday. Our children go to, you know, all these Catholic programs. We're really trying to form them as, you know, cradle Catholics. I did not have that opportunity as a secular atheist. But once I became a Catholic, like a card-carrying, you know, Catholic, that was it for me. It was like the equivalent of getting a neck tattoo. You know, there's no hiding it anymore.

I'm this, that's cute.

I'm a neck tattoo.

Yeah.

I mean, I like to say I'm not a domestic extremist, I'm extremely domestic, but these are the things, just going to church, you know, raising a large family. These are the things that mark you as like extreme and scary.

And so if I may ask, was there a financial hit for you and your husband?

Oh, absolutely. I mean, I was making, I, I, I worked at home with the first 4 children. I was a freelance writer, copywriter. And when my then oldest was in school, I got an opportunity out of the blue, sort of a dream job for a copywriter, enormous perks, 6-figure income, benefits, everything. And I was like, okay, we can make this work, you know. And leaving that was really hard. I mean, it was like gold-plated perks, everything. But it was like I had no, I mean, you could have offered me a million dollars you know what I mean? And that you would not have gotten that baby out of my arms.

So that, that's what I try to tell people when they say, well, we can't do it because of economics. And then I think of people like you whom I, I've met all of my life. And yeah, you're not rich.

No, not at all.

So you do what you think you have to do. I mean, that, that That would strike me as the answer.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I, I would love to ask people whose kids are now woke in retrospect, would you have taken a financial hit to ensure your kid is not woke?

Right.

Yeah. I try to, when I talk about daycare, people get really triggered, you know, well, you know, how can I afford not, not, not to send the child to daycare? How can I afford to stay home with my baby? And I'm like, you think there's not gonna be a cost. But there will be a cost and you'll just have to pay it later. You're just going to take the financial hit later. You know, you're just going to lose your, like you said, you're going to lose contact with your child. They're being raised by who knows who. You're not going to be able to form them. You're sort of stretching out that maternal bond and it gets kind of flabby. You have to, you know, if you're letting people make all those decisions for your own kids as they grow up, you're like less empowered. You've let these, you know, childcare experts make the decisions.

Were you able to stay in the same home as a result of this decision? Did you have to downsize?

We actually did move, but we actually moved closer to be with like our like-minded friends, you know, Catholic people, like around people who would basically accept us as extremely domestic people. And I mean, it was, I'm not gonna lie, it was really difficult. My husband had to get a new job. We, you know, we didn't go on fancy vacations.

Okay, this is really important. And I had no idea what your answer would be. You could have said, actually, we're— we have a million-dollar income and it was not an issue. I did not know what you would answer, but it is very important for people who say I can't homeschool or I can't stay home with my children or my child because of economic factors. You might be able. You have decided not to. I'm not blaming these people. I'm not judging them. But it is not true that you can't. Yeah, it is true that you have decided not to, and you have foregone a number of material things.

Oh, absolutely. I mean, I drive a—

All right, the book is Domestic Extremist. It's a great title.

It's—

and I, I have dubbed it the anti-feminist manifesto by a truly thinking woman. Domestic Extremist is up at DennisPrager.com. Hi everybody, I'm Dennis Dennis Prager. P.C. Keenan is her pseudonym. And whatever her name is, she is a very thoughtful writer. Book just came out, Domestic Extremist, and it's really an anti-feminist manifesto. Feminism is a strange, strange doctrine. I have said As long as I have thought about the issue, which is basically from the beginning. Do you know that in my 20s I debated Betty Friedan?

Wow, really?

Isn't that something?

Amazing.

There is actually a video of it somewhere. I really want to get— she walked out. She said, you are a male chauvinist piglet. I never knew why I wasn't a male chauvinist pig. So she walked off the stage. And I just continued talking.

That's amazing.

If the woman wishes to leave, fine.

Wow.

Yeah, it was quite— it was quite an experience. It showed you how fragile her ego was and her, in my opinion, the depth of her thought that she wouldn't just debate me. I don't yell at people, not then and not now. So when I say it's a strange doctrine, they don't— what I've always said is they don't care about women. They, they are much more anti-male than they are pro-female. And I wonder if that resonates at all with you. But I have a proof that they're not pro-female. They don't protect women's sports, right? Why isn't that proof?

They found women they like better, and those women are men. I mean, it's really amazing. They really did.

Oh, that's a good one.

They finally found women they like better than us, and that they hate conservative women, and now they just kind of dismiss all women in favor of men. I mean, men are dominant yet again thanks to feminism. Feminism enabled a lot of men to take advantage, full advantage of women who were liberated you know, from the horrible ideas like chastity and the patriarchy. And men were only too happy to take advantage of women who were self-sterilizing or on birth control. Men were like, sure, you know, no consequences for them. Abortion underwrites that lifestyle. And so men have always been— some men have always been able to benefit from feminism, the fruits of feminism. I'm not sure what women have gotten from this. I mean, A few more women in CEOs.

The highest rate of depression ever recorded in American history.

That's right. When I was writing the book, I found a study that Wharton did maybe 10 years ago on the gender gap of happiness. And they were shocked to discover that despite feminism, despite women's liberation, despite women having full equality and more opportunities, women were dramatically less happy than men. And they attribute that to women suddenly, instead of just comparing themselves to other women, now they're forced to compare themselves also to men, the highest achieving men, you know, men who are in all these high fields. And so women are, yes, the highest rates of antidepressant use, and that rate goes up as they age. It's really, it's really tragic.

I've written over 1,000 columns. They're all on the internet. 1,000. It's a lot. And I've only written one in all the thousand that was not my— that were not my— or that was not my words, if that is grammatically correct. And that was a transcription of a call made to me on my male-female hour by a woman in her 50s with a PhD and a well into the six figures income, a CEO of a company. And her lament: I followed feminism, I pursued career, I've been extremely successful in my career, and I go home and there's no husband and there are no children, and I made a terrible mistake with my life. And that's at 50, she realizes. What is she going to think at 70 or 80? And you, you go and say this to young women, but they, they don't really hear you, do they?

Right. No. I mean, young— one of the reasons I wrote the book was to hopefully peel off some of those young women before they become fully brainwashed, because we're going to need those young women, you know, to, to, to find young men to reproduce and basically save the country. But yeah, they, they're, you know, tough nuts to crack because the indoctrination now starts younger and younger. 12 years old in sex ed classes, girls are learning all about birth control and how you should explore your sexuality with as many partners as you like. There's no consequences. I mean, they're learning this so young. I have a friend who goes to, sends a kid to Brentwood School, which is like a fancy private school in Los Angeles, $60,000, $70,000 a year. A lot of celebrities go there. And the 6th grade health ed class there, they're learning, there was some topic they told me about called Black Queer Love. Okay, this is like in 11-year-old boys and learning about queer love. That's right, that's a topic in Brentwood School. So I don't even know what that is.

That's really important that you noted that.

Mm-hmm.

How do you explain the parents who are not bothered by what is going on in the schools? 5-year-olds having men in drag come to serenade them.

Yeah, it seems to be 3 groups of parents. Some of them are horrified and they're opting their kids out. They're pulling the kids out that week or they're finding new schools. They're totally up in arms and that's a pretty large chunk. The other chunk are just staying quiet. They don't have— they have no alternative. They would never dream of pulling a child out of the fancy school or homeschooling a child. They're kind of stuck and they try to counter-program the kids after school and kind of fix what they've mislearned. But in the other group, it is largely women who are only too happy to dive right in and force their kids to do it. The women are just desperate. And I think in many cases, you know, there's been studies, you know, they've been— the left has discredited the studies of women. The mothers who push the kids into this have, you know, higher rates of bipolar disorder. They're narcissists. They're, they're, you know, Munchausen by proxy has been brought up by some people. They want the attention, the glory of having a child who is an ally, who decides to get new pronouns. It brings them all of this social credibility, all of this. It's a giant dopamine hit. And that helps someone who is suffering from depression, who didn't get married, maybe is divorced, maybe is lonely, missed her chance. And now that she could live this great glorious life, through the poor kid. And that seems to be a lot of the, you know, my Freudian analysis of the whole situation.

What, what glorious life is she living through her kid? Financial success?

Well, you just— I mean, if you post on Instagram that you're, you know, your kid is now switching genders or whatever—

oh, that you are—

oh, you are, you are flooded with—

oh, I see. Okay, I'm sorry. Yeah, that should have been obvious to me. It's so sick. It wasn't obvious to me, even though I report sickness every day. You're right though, that is exactly correct. So it's not just the child who's flooded with attention and love saying that I, I am the other sex. It's the, it's the parent, usually the mother.

Yeah, I think that's the case with the younger children. With older, with teenagers, that is, tends to be driven by the, by the teenagers themselves who are kind of getting these messages off of the internet. And they're confused and they're depressed.

We're going to come back. I want to talk to you about marriage. There was a time when it was the most wonderful dream of a young woman to think about her wedding. What does she dream now? Back in a moment. The book Domestic Extremist is up at DennisPrager.com. Hi everybody. Domestic Extremist is the name of the book. The subtitle is A Practical Guide to Winning the Culture War, but it should have been, in fact, an anti-feminist manifesto, only because that's more what it is about. She's extremely thoughtful. I had her on a few weeks ago because of a brilliant piece that she wrote. Where was it? American— what?

It was in The Federalist.

Oh, The Federalist, right. Peachy Keenan is her pseudonym. The book is up at my website. So when I was a kid, I didn't have any sisters, so this was just something I learned about later. You know, I started dating women. I didn't marry till 32, but it seemed to me And maybe I was wrong. That's why I want to ask you, among other things, you're a woman.

Last time I checked, yeah.

And I assumed that most girls, at least in our civilization, had a sort of dream about her wedding day. What would she wear? What would it be like? Who would the man be? So a question to you Because I'm rethinking— I have been all of my life, and especially the last few years, rethinking everything. Do you believe that there is such a thing as feminine nature? I do, because I believe that being a female comes with certain psychological states, but I may be wrong. Do you believe that that is built into women to imagine their marriage day, at least in the world where we have a marriage day, or it was a construct of the past and the ease with which that has been shattered may prove that, hey, Dennis, you're wrong, that's not how women think, that was America until 1970. What do you think?

I think you're right. I think it is innate, the desire in almost every woman to sort of find a soulmate, to fall in love, to be loved, to be adored for life. I mean, I don't think anyone, you know, I think that the princess Cinderella myth, it exists in every culture, basically, in Asian cultures and all these cultures because it's so so fundamental. The fairy tales just kind of reveal the sort of basic human nature of what it is to be a woman. I don't— no woman grows up and dreams— no, no one, no little girl wants to be, you know, on OnlyFans, you know, stripping for thousands of men throwing money at her. I mean, no little girl has that fantasy naturally, right? Um, and I mean, yes, they have broken down marriage, but not fully. I mean, they haven't been fully successful What they, the best they've done is sort of made it like an option in the menu of things a woman can choose. Um, but I mean, this is why I wrote the book. I mean, yes, marriage rates are basically never been lower. And that is because the brainwashing has taught girls that it is, you know, it's one thing you could do. There's also polyamory, there's also open marriages, and you don't want anything to ever limit your ability to explore who you are. You might change, you know, you might decide to, um, you maybe you're not going to want to be married to a man, maybe you want to be married to a woman. And we have to sort of go back to, um, showing the facts of this. You're, you know, that lifestyle is not conducive to long-term happiness, period. Because, you know, um, in the book I actually researched these, this group of San Francisco lesbians who rediscovered monogamy and they termed it radical monogamy. And they're like, you know, we just found that, you know, sleeping around and like having all these different relationships wasn't making us happy. So we found that we discovered this new idea, radical monogamy.

Wait, so were they monogamous with a woman or with a man?

Yeah. With women. They're lesbians. Okay.

Right.

But hey, at least they're lesbians. At least they're women. They didn't cut anything off. Um, but they, they were talking about monogamy like it was this brand new thing they just found out about and how great it is. And they were writing articles about how, how incredible it is to develop this level of intimacy with one person over time. And it was so, it was so funny. So I'm thinking maybe we have to pitch monogamy as this like radical fringe idea to kids, make it cool again, because it is, it is obviously, we all, we all know it is that your mo— your best way to your best chance of long-term happiness.

Right? That's right. What's your theory on why it is overwhelmingly, I think 80% of teenagers who say they're the other sex are girls saying they're boys? Why isn't it 50/50?

Yeah, that's so fascinating. I think people have talked about it as, um, you know, ROGD, rapid onset gender dysphoria, which is where one teenage girl has it and then they all kind of— it becomes a sort of social contagion in a class. And it's largely driven by autism. I think there's much higher rates of autism among those teenage girls And so the idea that they would start—

there's more autism among boys.

Well, for some reason those girls—

oh no, I believe that. All right, well, we'll talk about that when we come back. All right, the book Domestic Extremist, P.C. Keenan, up at DennisPrager.com. Speaking to and with P.C. Keenan, K-E-E-N-A-N, Domestic Extremist, and I've dubbed it an anti-feminist manifesto. This woman is very, very thoughtful. So I'm asking for your thoughts on why you believe— we know for a fact that way disproportionately more teenage girls are saying they're boys than teenage boys are saying they're girls. So I was asking if you had a theory as to as to why?

I mean, I, I just, you know, I, I was once a teenage girl and I think it's sort of funny, or not funny, but sad that teenage girls think that, you know, hating your changing body is some like new thing. I think that's, that means you have some kind of disability or some mental, um, mental illness. But I mean, I think that most teenage girls, as you develop, you do hate your body. You do feel uncomfortable. You're like, what's going on here? It seems to, that's, seems to be much more acute among girls than boys. Boys get to have big muscles, they look cool, and they grow some facial hair and it's awesome. Girls, I think it's— it can be reluctant to embrace wom— womanhood. You get more attention, you're growing, you know, you're, you're developing and it can feel awkward and uncomfortable as your body changes. So I think that that obviously, um, is a driver to it. I mean, there's lots of times girls don't want to, You don't wanna deal with all the stuff that comes with puberty and all that. So I mean, I understand that, but we used to understand that that is part of puberty. That is just part of the process of growing up. Teenage years were always supposed to be hard. You're gonna hate yourself sometimes and feel uncomfortable and out of place and no one understands you. That used to be just what it was like before you became an adult. But now we've medicalized it and made it, now it has a special name, gender dysphoria, mental illness, depression. And there's a whole range of these pharmaceutical options that they're more than happy to prescribe you, including actually removing your body parts, the body parts that make you a woman. Um, and obviously we're, we're going down a road that is, I mean, it's baffling to me that we're, that me saying this is, you know, controversial and you saying this, um, is taboo to say this stuff, but here we are.

So I wanna go back to a question that I posed earlier. Based on the thesis I have that feminists don't give a damn about women. And my— one of my many, many, many proofs, aside from the fact that they have made more unhappy women than any doctrine in the history of the world, is that they don't defend women when men come in and ruin female sports. So how do you explain a woman who thinks it's okay for a biological man to race in swimming or in track or even weightlifting against women. How do you have any explanation for such a woman?

I mean, I really don't understand it, how you could, you know, be okay with young, young girls in a locker room with a naked, fully adult male with intact genitals, like, right in the shower, which—

when Leah Thomas, the University of Pennsylvania—

she would walk around, he would walk around fully exposed.

That's right.

I mean, and so I really don't understand it. My only explanation is that they're just so far gone. They're so lost in the, like, you know, in the dark forest of virtue signaling.

Among your ex-friends, would any defend males competing against females?

Oh, I'm sure all of them would. I think that probably in their heart of hearts, they're probably very grateful and glad that their own children have not decided to change genders, they're probably so relieved. But they can't say that. You know, they couldn't say that to friends or at a party. I mean, these private schools that I know people at, these are— the young kids are forced to say their own pronouns every time they speak in class to introduce themselves, to write— when they write their name on their homework, they have to add their pronouns. It starts so early. And so I think that in their heart of hearts, they're secretly very grateful that their kids aren't fully, you know, aren't fully swept away into the madness. But I think that they're just going to sit and clap, you know, next year at the Olympics when the women's— the United States women's track team, you know, what if there's no biological women on the podium? You know, not a single biological woman wins a medal in the Olympics. They'll just be forced to clap along at home because to not do that makes you a— you're a transphobe, you're a bigot. How dare you? You know, I think they're just afraid.

You were raised secular, uh, even, even atheist, you said?

Oh yeah.

So I assume your personal family, if you have siblings, are they still secular?

Um, what's amazing is that, you know, my parents are secular and I have two siblings. And when I converted about 10 years ago, my sister was like, couldn't believe that I was doing this. She was like, are you serious? You believe all of that? Okay. Like rolled her eyes, you know, Classic, like, reaction by someone who's atheist to someone who's deciding to convert to Catholicism, of all things. And the most amazing thing happened, Dennis. Honestly, it's a miracle. She had a very difficult time during the pandemic. She could not take a vaccine for medical reasons, and she was an outcast at school. She felt she was about to get fired from her job. She tried to get a medical exemption from all of these doctors, and the doctors would say to her, You know, yes, you, based on your, your medical underlying condition, you shouldn't take the vaccine. But I can't write you an exemption because I might get in trouble. So she, she was just like in this, in this terrified state of affairs. And finally, it actually drove her to convert. And she called me one day and she said, I just want to tell you something.

She married.

She's married. She has 3 children with one on the way. And she called me and she said, you're not going to believe this, but I'm converting to Catholicism. And honestly, I almost crashed my car. I was like, wait, what? Is this a joke? Like, and she, because she had told me that she had been reading the Bible. Her children had gone to a Methodist elementary school and they kind of got into it. They kind of enjoyed going to chapel and learning and they kind of taught her a little bit. But I think, you know, I do take a little credit. I kind of like broke the ice for her a little bit. And she actually was brought into the church this past Easter. So, I mean, it was really a miracle in my family.

And your other sibling?

He, so far, he says he believes in God, but he hasn't done anything yet.

Does he think that biological men should be able to compete with women?

No, of course not. I'm very fortunate that my parents and my siblings are all conservatives. We all grew up here in Los Angeles. I mean, I feel very grateful. Everybody in my family is on board.

I hope everybody reads Domestic Extremist. It has been a joy to have you, P.J. Kieman.

Oh, thank you so much, Dennis. It's my pleasure to be here.

Hi everybody, there's a column up at the Los Angeles Times. There's something, I admit, there's something I can't say perverse, but certainly idiosyncratic in me. I have always been fascinated by reading things that I fully disagree with. That is why I learned Russian. I learned Russian for one reason: to read the Soviet communist newspaper Pravda. Not to read Dostoevsky, not to even converse. I wanted to read what those I most differed with said. That has never left me. So I read the New York Times, LA Times, and the like. And first I will tell you that the level of argumentation is so poor that you wonder, are these people not bright? But it's hard for me to believe that they're not bright. They write well. I don't have an answer. I could only tell you that there is no logical sequence. Anyway, there is a column. It's called column, so they let you know this is not a news story, though there's no way to know actually the difference between a column and a, uh, and, and a news light, a news column in the, in the LA Times. Sorry, I just needed a drink of water. We're good. So here is the column. It is about, of course, LGBT. It's titled, Would Hate Disrupt a Drag Story Hour in Gay-Friendly Laguna Beach? Laguna Beach is a wealthy area in Southern California, in what's known as Orange County. Hate. See, this is part of the ability, and this has always been done. It was started when Stalin called Trotsky a fascist. The father of the Red Army, the father of communism in Soviet Union, Bolshevism, along with Lenin, was now a fascist. Well, the truth is there was some truth to that. There was no difference between communism and fascism, or minimal difference. In fact, communism has killed a lot more people. That's the one— that's one difference. Slaughtered, murdered, tortured. And fascism outside of Nazism has been a poor runner-up. So it's hate. If you don't want 5-year-olds to go to see a drag queen read a book, you are involved in hate. That is why I told you the intellectual level of their arguments is so low. They don't argue, they smear. You are a hater if you thought marriage should be defined as the union of a man and a woman, you were a hater. So therefore, you didn't have to— if you were a leftist, you didn't have to make an argument. You just declared the opposition haters. That is all they ever do. It's all they've done my whole life. So this guy, Gustavo Arellano, I visited I visited Laguna Beach this past Saturday on a gorgeous morning, the type of sunny days the seaside gem hadn't experienced in months, and so on and so forth. Beauty, however, wasn't what brought me to the coast. It was hate. Did you— you didn't happen to see this, did you? Oh, you found it to me? Then I assume you saw it. Hate. Hate drew him to the Pacific Coast, the city. For weeks, social media posts had trashed the Laguna Art Museum for planning to host storytime with a drag queen. Yes, they deserve to be trashed. It's an art museum. Why are they sexualizing children at the age of 5? Arellano Is that hate? It would be more accurate to say you hate children, that the art museum hates children, than to say that we hate LGBTQ people. I wouldn't say you hate them. I say you damage them as if you hate them, but you are so stupid that you don't even hate them and ruin them. You haven't qualified as a hater of children, you on the left. You don't hate children. You hate their innocence. Typical was one from the Greater Laguna Beach GOP, which alleged, with no evidence whatsoever, that the mere act of a drag queen reading a book to kids was part of a, quote, larger recent trend of sexualizing children. Did you get what he wrote? The key, the keywords, with no evidence whatsoever. What does that mean? You, Gustavo Arellano, wait a minute, let me understand something, sir. And you're welcome to come on the show anytime, anytime, but you won't, any, any more than the 39 professors at Arizona State who Wrote a letter protesting my appearance there, would come on my show. Among other things, leftists are cowards. Almost every leftist is a coward. We're not. I'll happily go to any one of your classrooms, any one of them, at my expense, and speak. So This is an amazing comment with no evidence whatsoever that the mere act of a drag queen reading a book to kids was part of a larger recent trend of sexualizing children. Really, there's no evidence that act does not sexualize children? A man wearing women's clothing and often dancing as well? Oh God, they lie with the ease with which you breathe, as I say every day. These attacks were the latest volley in an ugly battle against queer anything in Southern California. Really? Queer anything? Is that right? You're lying, Mr. Arellano. You are lying. But you don't know you're lying because truth is not a value to you. So it's not like you say, I'm gonna tell a lie. Really? Queer anything? Is that right? Conservatives are attacking queer anything? That's a lie. It's a gigantic lie. But doesn't matter to you, or by the way, I would imagine to almost any LA Times reader. All right. Now let's see here. Laguna Art Museum staff were calmly readying for the reading when I showed up. Executive Director Julie Perlin Lee— shakaroo, a woman— told me they always try to sync up the space's monthly storytime with a topical theme, such as a winter Ukrainian folktale in December. For this Pride Month, the museum contacted the literacy nonprofit Drag Story Hour. And then Perlin Lee's deputy director talked to other museums that had hosted similar events and heard nothing but a positive experience. Really? They heard nothing but a positive experience? That's remarkable. Every parent whose kid went to a drag queen reading Thought it was a positive experience? Well. But I'm sure everyone has experienced some degree of what we heard too, Pearl and Lee continued, alluding to the social media criticism. I shouldn't be surprised because that's how things seem to be nowadays, she said. But, she concluded, gesturing toward a group of rainbow-clad adults, Outside the museum's glass doors, there's tons of support too. Kat Schroeder and Melissa Desjardins— that's shocking, two more women— handed out small pride flags to anyone who wanted them and wore t-shirts that read "Free Mom Hugs." Isn't that beautiful? Free mom hugs. Wow. All right, now I want you to understand something, that, uh, I— one of the reasons that I am reading you this article— please put it up at DennisPrager.com because I want people to see the pictures of how young the kids are. So I see a picture of 1, 2, 3 kids, and I see 3 women and 1, 1 man. The 3 kids are all girls. They are at most 5 years of age. You've got to see these pictures. We're going to put the article up now. At DennisPrager.com. This is really important that you understand what is fed to people on the left, like this column by this writer Gustavo Arellano, the LA Times. About the hate. That's right, if you oppose 4-year-olds, 5-year-olds having stories read to them and dancers dancing by drag queens, then you're a hater. Yes, you want to know— Alan wants to know who the parents are. Well, in the picture we have 3 women and 1 man, all girls here. I'm sure there are boys there too. They all look 4 or 5 or 6 years of age. What are them— what are these mothers with these kids on their laps, what are they thinking? It's a beautiful thing for my kid to see a man dressed as a woman. Apparently, apparently, with the emphasis on the word parent. The families eventually streamed in. The drag queen for the day was stuck in traffic. Mind you, Gustavo Arellano calls this person a drag queen. A drag queen— there is a definition. It is a man dressed as a woman. By the way, the drag queen's name is Miss Pickle. Why isn't it Ms. Pickle? It's the only time they use Miss on the left is when it's a drag queen. Isn't that interesting? Okay, suddenly a 6-foot-and-change blonde in a flowing neon coral pantsuit strode into the room with a 'Hello, Miss Pickle.' was ready to read. She has dealt with enough Drag Story Hour backlash this year. Wait a minute, she— Mr. Arellano, I don't understand why you used she. Isn't a drag queen a he? This is not trans. It's transvestite, but it's not transgender. How is it a— how is it a she? Do you have an answer? I don't have an answer. This is not a rhetorical question. I don't have an answer. If I went to Miss Pickle and said privately, are you a man or a woman? I have no doubt that Miss Pickle would say a man. That's the whole point. You're not coming to see a woman read a story. There would be no issue. You're seeing a drag queen, a man dressed as a woman. And this writer for the LA Times says she— in April, protesters disrupted one of her readings at the Sherman Oaks Martin Pollard Branch Library with screams of perversion and abomination. You know, if Miss Pickle was frazzled by these troubles, she didn't show it in Laguna. She was funny and sassy and patient and caring. I see. The book for the morning: Lauren Brantz's Feminist Baby Finds Her Voice. Wow, that— the books for the morning have included that book. This is what you want your 5-year-old to be heard from an adult, right? Feminist Baby Finds Her Voice. A feminist baby. This is sick. Yes, it's perverse, Miss Pickle, and all you mothers who brought your kids there. And worst of all, the LA Times and its writer. Yes, it is perverse that that's what you read to kids. Feminist Baby Finds Her Voice, another one about how it's okay to be different, and another one about having a big heart. Hmm, what did I see? There was a Oh, I saw another book, but I don't remember the name. You know, by the way, that kids are doing worse academically than at any time in American history. And nevertheless, or I should say in part because of the fact that they find so much time to read to them books like Feminist Baby Finds Her Voice. That may be one reason your kids are not learning at school. They're being indoctrinated into being profoundly unhappy, lost souls, just like the people who bring them there and the people who read to them. The grand finale. Are you ready? This is from someone who likes it. The grand finale was the hips on the drag queen go swish, swish, swish. You hear that? And you have to be a hater to oppose that. A songbook by a little miss hot mess and the greater Laguna Beach GOP described as Do you want your 4-year-old to be a little hot mess shaking his booty and working it? Why is that incorrect, Gustavo? Isn't that what you just read? The hips on the drag queen go swish, swish, swish. Miss Pickle asked everyone to get up and dance along to the book's lyrics. Shoe stomped, hair went up, jewels blinged. Hmm, it's a word I don't know. What does blinged mean?

Bling.

Bling.

Bling is jewelry.

What does it shine like? Being shiny. Shoulders shimmed. The reading ended, the adults applauded, and the children swarmed toward Miss Pickle for photos and stickers. Sasha Deming of Laguna Hills had never been to a drag story hour before but showed up to support the museum with her husband and daughter. The husband— well, I had no idea what to expect, but it was great, she said. Of critics, Deming said, that says more about their own inner mind than the actual reality. I'd like to have her on. Sasha Deming, you're invited. I'd like you to tell me what it is about my mind, my inner mind, that you know as a result of my thinking this is not appropriate for 5-year-olds. They make these statements and I never know what exactly they mean. Laguna Beach natives Lauren and Graham Unterberger brought their daughter Elliot, huh, who had placed a pride flag through her hair bun. Well, okay. That's what the LA Times columns are like. I once wrote for them regularly. It was a different world. Hey everybody, Dennis Prager here. In the first hour, I mentioned to you the Beyond Growth conference the Greens of Europe put on big elaborate affair, and that is their new call, that we should all aim to end economic growth. I swear to you, I am being honest and literal. That is the Greens' latest call. Beyond growth. No growth and negative growth are now the ideals. Which they are creating with their green movement. I told you, I've told you this the whole time, the green agenda is peripherally related to environmentalism. If they cared about global warming, they would all be advocates of nuclear power. But nuclear power would solve the problem and we would still grow. They don't want us to grow. It is a sickness. Again, I don't know from what part of the human species this derives. I have a theory because I listened for hours to their conference. They are all empty. They are looking for meaning in a post-growth world. They are nearly all young. They want meaning. They have none. They were given nothing in the secular world in which they grew up. Nothing. I'd love to know what percentage of them even marry. They have nothing. This gives them meaning. They dream about a world in which there is no growth, but there will still be— what exactly? I didn't— I couldn't figure that out. There will be meaning. They will have meaning and no growth. So the final speaker was this young woman from Belgium. And listen to the real sickness of these greens.

I'm going to say something that is unfortunately controversial to this institution, but it really shouldn't be. If we move beyond growth, we have to acknowledge what lays below our growth: white supremacy, colonialism, and imperialism.

They're all white.

And I really wanted to join Professor Sultana and the other speakers who made sure this is addressed. White supremacy justifies a global system of exploitation and extractivism. Colonialism lays at the foundations of the European economy, institutions, corporate value chains, trade deals, investment agreements, and geopolitical structures of wealth accumulation, which means that there is no degrowth without decolonization.

All right, well, let's stop it there for a moment. It's almost a parody. It's like it almost— it is almost a parody. That is right. They're still applauding, by the way. They're standing up, they're applauding. There is no degrowth without decolonization. Remember, you understand, they're for degrowth. If you don't understand the threat to everything you cherish from the Greens, then you don't understand the threat to everything you cherish from the transgender movement. Not from transgender individuals, the movement. It means you have decided not to confront the evils of our day. Raising children with no gender or sexual identity and the belief that growth is a white supremacist colonialist. There was a new -ist. They're always coming up with -ists. That's a feature of the left. Extractionist. Yeah, you— yes, you're an extractionist. I want you to know, folks, I work with a self-confessed extractionist. And you acknowledge that?

I totally acknowledge it.

You want to extract minerals from the earth? From Mother Earth.

Do you know any way to make anything without doing that?

Yes, there is no way to make anything without doing that. They don't want to make anything. They admit it.

I mean, the—

what is that? I don't understand though.

The podium she's standing on.

Well, yes, of course.

Yes.

Put this up. I think people should be able to watch it. Put it up at dennisprager.com. Now, I did a lot of homework for you folks. I watched it for about 2 hours. It's longer than that. By the way, I made an error. It was not Brownstone, it's Gatestone, that magnificent website that brought this to my attention. Gatestone. Dennis Prager here. Thanks for listening to the Daily Dennis Prager Podcast. To hear the entire 3 hours of my radio show commercial-free every single day, become a member of Pragertopia. You'll also get access to 15 years' worth of archives, as well as the daily show prep. Subscribe at pragertopia.com.