Intellectual Inbreeding

This is a transcript from my radio show. Catch up on old episodes by subscribing to the podcast.

---

I need to discuss a sensitive subject with you. Inbreeding. Now, friends, we're not talking about Alabama today. I'm sorry, Alabama. I mean, you people make jokes about Mississippi. The rest of us make jokes about you. Did you hear about Alabama? The governor over there has gotten so mad about the college football championship, that they have bought a bunch of septic tanks. When they learn how to drive them, they're going to invade Georgia. Oh, I kill myself. Oh, I don't care if y'all find it funny. In all seriousness, let's talk about inbreeding. Genetically, do you remember Punnett squares? I loved biology when I was a kid and the chromosomes and the dominant and recessive traits and the big X, little X, and the big Y, little Y, and the like. For blue eyes and green eyes and blonde hair and red hair and black hair and the like. When you inbreed, you contain the pool of genes and, over time, you expand the recessive traits that become dominant. As the recessive traits become dominant, bad things happen to the gene pool.

In California, they have just built this overpass. It's a very big... I think it's a 200-foot wide overpass over the interstate on... What is it? The 401 or whatever out there. The big busy highway. It connects two mountain and valley passes so that the mountain lions can cross the interstate. The road is so busy that the mountain lions out there are becoming inbred and, in becoming inbred, they're becoming extinct. Some of them are more and more becoming sterile. They've got health problems. They're scrawny. They're showing all the signs of inbreeding. In deer populations... When you have deer parks... Great Britain, for example, has deer parks. Oftentimes, they're walled in. Very large. I mean, we're talking several hundred acres, but walled in. The deer get inbred. Disease infested. They get scrawny. They have to bring in populations and let out populations to mix with other populations of deer in order to keep the gene pool healthy.

You find this in situations in certain parts of the world in the past. Not so much now as people have become familiarized with it. I mean, even in royal lines in Europe. The inbreeding that happened over periods of time. Developing hemophilia, mental defect, physical handicap, deformity, death. Inbreeding is very, very bad. This is why we have laws against inbreeding. One, it is somewhat abusive, but also at the same time, it pollutes the gene pool in ways that society has agreed is bad. In ways, whether you call it morality or whatnot, we as a society have recognized over time that inbreeding genetic inbreeding, biological inbreeding, is something that has to be prohibited by law. It must be actively discouraged. For the sake of the human species, it must be banned. What we do not do as a society is ban intellectual inbreeding. What happens is that the voters themselves tend to take action against intellectual inbreeding. Right now, the political left in this country is suffering from such intellectual inbreeding the whole must be... the herd's got to be culled in some way. Not physically, but electorally. We see this in conversations with gun control right now and gun violence. But not just that.

Let me explain what I'm talking about here so you understand it. I've been using this phrase a lot lately because you see it. You may not even realize you're seeing it, but what you're seeing is a form of intellectual inbreeding where all of the ideas being preferred are ideas that are recirculated and regurgitated from a few sources and there's no intellectual diversity allowed in. There's no chain of custody of ideas that can be contributed that challenge the ideas, shake up the ideas, or refine the ideas, and improve the ideas. It has become a bit of religious dogma where... In the early days of Christendom, there were ideas that were grounded in Scripture, but oftentimes misworded, poorly worded. They allowed other ideas that were heresies to come about. The Church would have these councils to get together and refine the ideas and refine them to their purest form.

Like the Trinity, which is a very hard concept to explain. But if you are a Christian, you believe in the Trinity. It's settled Christian orthodoxy that, if you do not believe in the Trinity, you are not a Christian. There are people who say, "I'm a Christian, but I reject the Trinity." Well, in Christendom, settled since the 300s, you're not a Christian. It's why when pushed on the conversation... They don't like to say it because we have so many who are friends, but Orthodox Christians will say Mormonism doesn't classify as Christianity because they reject the Trinity. I mean, people literally fought wars and died over this idea. But it was refined. It was honed over time through councils. They came up with a defining idea.

We don't do stuff like that anymore. We rarely have councils. The Catholics may. The Orthodox may. Protestantism rarely does. One of the closest things that has come about is either the Chicago statement on biblical errancy or the Nashville statement on marriage. But intellectual movements typically allow in ideas that may be heterodox ideas that are refined into an orthodoxy. Progressivism has stopped allowing that. And progressivism as a result has devolved into this intellectual inbreeding, where they believe in the righteousness of their ideas and they're not allowed to refine their ideas and evolve those ideas and let those ideas breathe in a way that breed new ideas that could challenge contemporary understandings of things.

As a result, when we're confronted with school shootings, the Democrats will tell you that the politics are on their side, this is bad for the GOP, and the only solution is to enact gun control. Not just expanded background checks, but the base of the party wants gun confiscation. They want the guns rounded up. They want bans on guns. They want manufacturer reliability lawsuits to drive them out of business. And none of these ideas are going to pass. We're not going to put the gun industry out of business in this country nor are we going to prohibit people from owning guns because we have a Second Amendment. What I find striking and why this is, you can tell, intellectual inbreeding is because, when confronted by reality, they cannot pivot. When confronted by reality, they cannot change their idea.

And here is the reality on guns for the left. Despite what you think, despite the superficial polling that says American support restrictions... I know lots of Americans, including a lot of Republicans, who say I support restrictions on guns. Do you support a national database of gun owners? Well, no, I don't support that one. Do you support a 48 or 72 hour delay on purchasing your guns? Well, I don't support that one. Do you support expanded background checks? I don't support that one. Do you support requiring everyone to go through a background check including person-to-person friend purchase? I don't support that one. Every idea that is individually talked about as a restriction, a majority of Americans tend to oppose it in the states that matter. In California, New York, even in urban areas in Georgia or Ohio or Texas, people who are moderate may support these things, but overall, the voters in that state don't. And yet to Democrats, the only solution is to restrict the guns. Confiscate the guns. They have no other idea because they're intellectually inbred on the issue of guns. They've allowed in no countervailing authorities, ideas, orthodoxies, doctrines, or mere thoughts. It's all about we got to round up all the guns. And it's not going to happen. It has caused them... Every idea, every descendant idea, comes from that one idea. It is inbred off of that idea and it's not a viable idea.

The same holds true with abortion and it's why the Democrats have lost the debate on abortion. You can tell that the Democrats actually are more worried about the gun issue than the abortion issue because Chuck Schumer was willing to force every Democrat in the Senate to go on record supporting abortion on demand until birth, but has not put them on record about gun control. No show vote there. But on the abortion issue with Democrats as well, it is all abortion on demand until the moment of birth until the child is fully out of the womb and into the world. Even then, some Democrats are okay until it leaves the hospital. Until the baby leaves the hospital. Bill Clinton used to say safe, legal, and rare. These days, it is on demand at any time. They've evolved in one direction. It has become an intellectually inbred movement to the point that they can't even understand the other side's arguments.

Same with guns. They can't understand the other side's arguments. When you talk about having one exit into schools, they start mocking you as, oh, the fire marshal will shut you down on that. That's what Chuck Schumer did. They can't understand, they can't fathom, the idea of let's have one entry point in schools and lots of exits... like every building in America does... because their idea has become intellectually inbred. It is one idea. That's it. That's the only thing that will work and yet it's the one thing that cannot pass.

They do the same thing on the environment. The environmental orthodoxy is we're all going to die within a decade because of climate change and so the government must crack down on things. As a result, the Democrats are deploying policies to drive up energy prices, to force you to battery powered cars, devoid of recognition of the idea there aren't enough battery powered cars nor enough lithium to build new battery powered cars to put all of Americans in and, even if there were and they succeeded, we don't have the power grid to be able to power all the cars without a collapse of the power grid. They cannot wrap their hands around these things because of the intellectual inbreeding within progressivism these days that tells them there's only one solution and you're not allowed to contemplate adding to it, refining it, honing it, shifting it, modifying it based on reality.

Like with genetic biological inbreeding, where it eventually leads to extermination and extinction, it leads to irreversible harm, it leads to biological mutational problems in the species, intellectual inbreeding does the same. Republicans, conservatives, are not immune from it, but we are right now far less likely to suffer from it than the left. Because, with the left, they have the academic bubble, they have the corporate bubble, and they have the political coastal elite bubble. They have the media bubble. They're all in this together. Corporate titans, media people, liberal Democratic politicians, the billionaire class and the base of the Democratic party, upper income White women named Karen. They're all in this party bubble together and they can't see outside the bubble. They think they're all there, so everyone must be like this.

Not everyone is intellectually inbred. Many people, particularly conservatives, are challenged on a daily basis by their ideas. These people are not. That's part of intellectually inbreeding. You're never challenged on your ideas because you are in an isolated existence with a group of yes people who all agree with you so your ideas are never challenged. Your ideas do not have to be refined whereas I am a conservative. On a daily basis, my ideas are challenged by people on the right, by people on the left, by people in the middle, by people in the media, by people at the corporate level, you name it. My ideas get challenged. I am required to understand their ideas, articulate their ideas as fairly as possible, and argue against their ideas based on refining my ideas to make them easily explainable to other people.

One of the key tenets of intellectual inbreeding is the massive use of polysyllabic words. Multiple syllables. Big words that no one understands because it makes them sound smart when their ideas are very stupid. You see that on the left as well. It is all genetic intellectual inbreeding. The use of big words to hide ignorance is the hemophilia of intellectual inbreeding. It causes their ideas to hemorrhage out and fall flat and die in the real world at the hands of voters. And that's what's going to happen to the Democrats.

They're so convinced that their ideas are real. Their ideas are valid. Their ideas are the only ones and their only solutions are the impractical ones that will never pass. But in their bubble, they're the ones they demand. They're the ones they insist on. They're the ones they believe are the viable ones. And it will end badly for them at the hands of the voters in November. No matter how much they agitate for abortion, gun control, and high gas prices, the voters themselves will rebel against those at the polling. It turns out, when you dive into the polls on guns, voters aren't nearly as in favor of gun control as they tell the pollsters who never actually probe the idea. And that's part of the intellectual inbreeding of the left. They're not challenged, they're affirmed all the time in the media, and they never have to think about what's coming. But something bad is coming to them.