Why The MEDIA FEARS TRUTH TELLERS Like Jordan Peterson

So you did this, I thought, fascinating video where you analyzed Elon Musk.

Oh, yeah.

Tulsi Gabbard and J.D. vance and Bobby Kennedy and Trump.

Right.

And so in. So I had a zoom with you the day before the elections and Trump has won. And now we have all these people that are losing their minds that have Trump derangement syndrome, but there's people that have Jordan Peterson derangement syndrome or Bobby Kennedy derangement syndrome or Tucker Carlson derangement syndrome. What do you, first off, love to get your thoughts on where we're at now you can't vote because you're Canadian, so. But you have a tremendous amount of insight on politics and you're doing stuff.

Well, I could talk about the Democrats. You know, I worked with the Democrats behind the scenes for like six years, a long time and quite a lot. A friend of mine who I worked with, who was very well connected with the DNC and the Democrat hierarchy nationally is one of their main political strategists. He just so you all know, this is something perhaps you like to know. In 2017, I made an offer to the Democratic Party elite. Me and Rogan and Dave Rubin and Bret Weinstein and Ben Shapiro. We invited them all to come on our podcast. It was an open ended offer. We have it in writing. My friend, his name is Greg Hurwitz, released this the other day on Twitter because all the Democrats and the legacy media types are squawking up and down about 30 that the conservatives have, you know, created this new non legacy media space and are dominating it and how unfair that is. It's like, you sons of bitches, we asked you for seven years, seven years to come and talk to us. And he, Greg got nowhere. He couldn't find one. Now I eventually talked to Dean Phillips, who had run for president on the Democrat side. You may remember Dean, because he dropped out fairly early in the presidential race and he was willing to talk to me because he just got savaged by the Democrat Party structure when he dared to put his foot forward as a genuine contender on the Democrat side. So I did get to speak to the odd Democrat who got bitten so hard by the radical leftists that they, well, that they were, that they were willing to share their experience, let's say. Why am I bringing that up? Well, one of the things that we're going to have to wrestle with going forward is, you know, the country is very disunited and it isn't useful that half the population, let's say the rough half that voted for Kamala Harris are living in terror of the Trump mob, first of all, because I don't think that's necessary. And second, Trump's gonna have to work with those people in many ways anyways. And generating a bunch of additional enmity isn't going to be helpful. Like, the Democrats are going to have to wake up to the danger of the radical leftists. And they're so asleep on that front that it's a kind of bloody miracle. You know, even When I interviewed Mr. Kennedy first, that was a year ago when he just was starting his presidential campaign, I asked him a question that I've asked all the Democrats that I've had private conversations with, because these people will speak with me privately, but not on the podcast. I said, when does the left go too far? None of them, by the way, I never got an answer from any of the centrist Democrats to that question, which is really quite appalling. And Kennedy said, I don't want to run that kind of divisive campaign. And I thought, well, you know, fair enough. But that's not a very good answer because there's real problems on the radical side of the Democrat political spectrum as there are. There are commensurate problems, although they're not as profound yet on the right wing side, because there's no shortage of derisive, anonymous, gleeful right wing anti Semitic trolls online. And there's plenty of them and they're noisy as hell and they're not good. But they don't have the institutional power that the progressives have, especially in the universities. They're just completely blind to the danger of the progressive movement. And they won't. We've been talking to the Democrats for seven years. Like, the message was very clear. The radicals are gonna do you in. And their answer was, they don't mean what they say. It's like, have it your way. They mean it. When Kamala Harris was. Kamala Harris was talking about equity, she either didn't know what she was talking about, which is inexcusable, or she knew what she was talking about, which was malevolent. Those are the options. It's like, they just mean equality of opportunity. It's like, then why do they have a different word? They don't mean equality of opportunity, they mean equality of outcome. And if you're foolish enough to believe in equality of outcome, then you deserve to lose the Senate, lose the House and lose the presidency. Right? And that's what happened. You know when I think I was talking to Hurwitz today and he said that he believed that the swing issue was the trans issue. That was enough to swing the vote, and rightly so, because what's happening with regards to this surgical sterilization and mutilation of children is. I have never seen any worse form of medical and psychological malpractice in. In, not only in my life as an observer of the psychological and medical community, but in my studies of serious psychopathology. It is brutal and unacceptable beyond belief. And it's part of the ideology that the Democrats wouldn't. The moderate Democrats would not recognize. And so they've got a fair bit of mopping up to do, and I hope they manage it, because it would be good for a Trump administration, especially one that's got the reins of power the way that Trump now does. To have an effective opposition, you always need an effective opposition. You need an effective opposition within the confines of your own family, you know. So hopefully they'll do a little soul searching and decide that postmodern communism is not the right way forward. So we'll see.

What advice would you give to someone that is, in their mind, they believe Trump is a rapist, Trump is a racist. Trump is this horrible human. He doesn't care about people, and he's also the President of the United States.

Well, hey, I hope you're enjoying this video. And I want to let you know that I have a new book that's come out, and if you'd like to get it absolutely free, and there's a link below in the description, or you can wait till the end of this video, or you can simply go to Joe's freebook.com and you can get a copy there.

The first thing you could probably do is stop watching CNN and msnbc. It's like, seriously, you know, I've been watching in the last week, it's been unbelievably interesting from my perspective, personal perspective, even, to watch the legacy media finally wake up and realize that it's not 2005. You know, six months ago, seven months ago, I read an account of Gavin Newsom opining about Joe Rogan and me, said that his own son was watching Rogan and me and other fringe figures. And I thought, I don't know what planet you occupy, Mr. Newsom, but Joe Rogan is the most powerful journalist who's ever lived by an order of magnitude. You know, CNN is the fringe. MSNBC is the fringe. Gavin Newsom is the fringe. Joe Rogan is. He runs the most popular podcast in 92 countries. It's like, that's not fringe. And so if you are suffering from Trump derangement Syndrome, I would say you could watch the podcast he did with Rogan and with Theo Vaughn, and you could see what he was actually like when he wasn't completely on the defensive from being attacked, like no other politician in living memory has ever been attacked. But more importantly than that, even independently of Trump himself, and I actually think that all the torture that he's gone through in the last eight years has mellowed him out to some genuine degree. Even if you're frightened of Trump, it's like, oh, so you're also frightened of Kennedy, who was a Democrat, and you're frightened of Tulsi Gabbard, who was a Democrat, and you're frightened of Vivek Ramaswamy and Vance, who in a normal world would be a Democrat, and Trump himself, who's pretty weird Republican. It's like. It's not like, well, seriously, Trump as a Republican, what a crazy world we live in. And so Trump has gathered these people around him, and he's invited them in and accepted them, and they're a very strange crew. And. And even if Trump has his rough edges, which he genuinely does, it's like, well, he's not alone there now. And so that's a really good deal. Like, my sense was, especially when Musk jumped the board, I thought, oh, if Musk would do something like establish a Department of Governmental Efficiency, I would support Trump just for that. Like, just that. But that's not all he's got. I think Gabbard is great. She's very, very solid. She's the candidate the Democrats should have run. She's everything Kamala Harris claimed to be. It's like, why the hell didn't they run her? They could have. You know, maybe it's because she had her own thoughts. I mean, who knows? Well, So, you know. Well, then the other thing I'd say about Trump, and this is even more important than the team, which is really relevant, but more importantly, the best predictor of someone's future behavior is their past behavior. So if you're hiring someone, you should look at their general cognitive ability. You should look at their temperament. But if you have a track record that's quantifiable of their performance in that position, and it's positive. It's like, there you go. That's the best evidence that you have, technically. And I don't know if everyone forgot, but Trump was president for four years, and he wasn't Hitler. In fact, zero wars. Zero wars is not many wars, right? And more than that, more than that, zero wars. That's not nothing. That's remarkable accomplishment, you know, but more than that, he also spearheaded the Abraham Accords. Now, the possibility of establishing the Abraham Accords was there in the previous Democrat administration and they, the State Department defined it as impossible and they had for decades. And even in the Trump administration, it took the Trump people a couple of years before they were willing to take the risk. But they did take the risk. And you know, you may have noticed or you may not have is even after October 7, even after Iran did absolutely everything it could to drive the Muslim world into the hands of the extremists, they pulled no punches in doing that. It was a last ditch attempt to save their sad Mullah hides. The Abraham Accords held. And I know that if Biden would have been, this is an appalling fact, if Biden would have been willing to give Trump some credit, which he should have, because Mr. Trump might have just ridden off into the sunset if he, if they had been willing to give the devil his due, you know, he should have got the Nobel Peace Prize for those Abraham Accords. But even more importantly, the Saudis were ready to sign that damn accord and Biden wouldn't do it because it would shed positive light on Trump. And that was inexcusable. It was inexcusable. And my suspicions are that, you know, if things lay themselves out, like we hope they might, that the Saudis will sign the Abraham Accord in the next year or so and that's a big deal. You know, it might even stop the, you know, there's terrible animosity developing in many ways between the extremists in the Islamic world and the west, broadly speaking, if you're paying attention to X, you saw what happened in Amsterdam this week, which was just absolutely unforgivable and almost completely under reported on the legacy media, you know, but there are positive things brewing within the Islamic world and it's possible that the Abraham Accords are a pathway in that direction. And so, and Trump, he established those. So no wars and the Abraham Accords in four years without being Hitler, it's like, what the hell are you worried about? He's going to be Hitler now. Why now? Like, what's changed? Why would he be. He's not going to run again, not least because he can't. But he's also. How old is he? 78. He's like four more years. I know he's a tough bastard and he can keep. Well, he is. And he's got a tremendous amount of energy, but, you know, he's got all these other people around him now. My sense is he'll be able to just finish out these four years and end it with grace. And I, given that he was president already for four years and his track record, it's like, what are you worried about? You think that was all a ruse? And the thing about Trump is he didn't know what he was doing the first time around. You know, he didn't know who to hire. He didn't. He did. He wasn't a politician. He didn't know anything about the ins and outs of Washington, really. Well, he's a whole different character now. And, you know, his team has already started the difficult process of hiring the, you know, tens, 10,000 people that they have to staff the new administration with. They're already all over that. And so I think. I think and pray that he'll be much more successful the second time. And hopefully he can be magnanimous, you know, and say to the Democrats who've been terrified into paralysis by the lies of the legacy media, it's like, you know, you guys can just relax. We're not going on a witch hunt. We're just gonna get the economy rolling better than it ever has in history. And we've got the people behind us to do this. We've got important things to do. And so, you know, sit back and watch and try not to fret too hard. And, you know, the probability that the world's coming to an end is actually much lower than it was a week ago, you know. Well, you've already seen that. You know, you've already seen Hamas make peace noises, and you've seen the same thing with China and Russia. That's not too bad for, like, three days. And so it wouldn't surprise me, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Trump had a peace agreement in hand with Russia and Ukraine before he takes office. And I know. I don't know if you know this, but there were peace offerings on the table in May of 2022, and they were solid, and the Russians were ready to sign, and the Biden administration refused it. Now, you know, I think there's room for wide, relevant differences of opinion about the situation in Ukraine and Russia, but it is not like. It's not like the Russians won't deal, especially if they're dealing with Trump. And so I guess I'd ask the Democrats, who are reasonable, it's like, well, hold your nose for six months, you know, and try not to freak out. And another thing to Think about, too. And this is good in a general political sense. I've thought about this very deeply. You know, in the biblical story of Exodus, Moses is the archetypal leader, and he leads his people away from slavery and tyranny toward the promised land, which is always what a leader does, by the way, through the desert of doubt, toward the promised land. And Moses is severely punished at the end of his life for using force when he's called upon to use persuasion. Right so near. When the Israelites are on the border of the promised land, they run out of water. It's physical water and the water of life. And God tells Moses to speak to the rocks and have them deliver the water that will redeem the Israelites. And instead, Moses takes his staff of authority, that rod, you know, that can turn into a serpent. That's the magical symbol of healing, by the way, that the physicians use. He takes that rod and he strikes the rocks twice to force them to complete. And God's response to that is that he sentences Moses to death before he reaches the promised land. And that's a hell of a punishment for someone who had been, awhat would you say, a devoted servant of God for decades and who undertook an unbelievably responsible task and who united the fractious Israelites and took them away from slavery. He's punished. Why? Because he used force when he was asked to invite and convince. And so one of the things to consider, too, when you're trying to evaluate the claims of any given political leader, any leader or yourself, for that matter, is if you use fear and compulsion, then you're a tyrant in waiting. You should formulate your offerings to people in the form of an invitation. It's like, here's something we could do together. You know, are you on board now? It's a little bit more difficult in the case of those people who just will not fly. Right. You know, like, what do you do with criminals? Invitations don't work very well. And so, you know, you still have to have a cynical eye for people who misbehave, let's say. But by and large, you should be structuring your policies on an invitational basis. That's also how you foster trust. That was the big catastrophe with the COVID debacle. It's like, we're going to use force. It's like, okay, we're not going to trust public health for the next five decades. How's that for a response? Well, that's a bit counterproductive, all things considered. You know, that's a Good thing to think about when you're negotiating, too. It's like you want people fully on board with your offer because then they bring their best to the table. You don't do that with fear and you don't do that with compulsion. And so when you're watching the climate Nazis, for example, brandish their flags of terror, you think, well, you're trying to frighten me into commission, into submission. Maybe I don't trust you. Then if your tools are fear and force, we're doing this for. Because it's better for you. It's because it's going to bring a better future into being. I see. So you're going to use fear and force, force to bring a better future into being. I don't think so. I don't think so. And so that's part of what makes me skeptical of the climate. Well, there's 50 things that make me skeptical about it, but one of them, the most fundamental, is likely. I see. You're going to compel people to do this, are you? Instead of making energy cheaper, which is what you would do if you were competent. No, we're going to make it five times as expensive and we're going to force you to use it. It's like, okay, got it. I understand they've done that in the uk, right? UK energy prices are about five times what they are in the US and that means all the poor people are way poorer than they would have to be. And I don't see that as a net gain. Kamala Harris was. Kamala Harris was talking about equity. She either didn't know what she was talking about, which is inexcusable, or she knew what she was talking about, which was malevolent. Those are the options. It's like, they just mean equality of opportunity. It's like, then why do they have a different word? They don't mean equality of opportunity, they mean equality of outcome. If you're foolish enough to believe in equal.