0:00

You are listening to a free version

0:02

of the majority report Support

0:04

this show at join the

0:07

majority report comm and get an

0:09

extra hour of content daily It

0:18

is Thursday May

0:20

30th 2024

0:22

my name is Emma Vigeland in for Sam

0:25

Cedar and this is the five-time award-winning majority

0:27

report We are

0:29

broadcasting live steps From

0:32

the industrially ravaged Gowanus canal

0:34

in the heartland of America

0:36

downtown Brooklyn, USA on

0:39

the program today Dr.

0:42

Evian Leidig author

0:45

of the women of the far right

0:47

social media influencers and online radicalization And

0:50

later in the show Kate Wagner of the nation

0:52

will be with us to talk about how luxury

0:56

Brands are buying up our cities

1:00

Also on the program Israel has

1:02

seized and sealed the

1:05

nine-mile Egypt Gaza border

1:08

Rafa is right near that

1:10

part Two

1:13

more Biden officials resign in protest

1:15

of Biden's Gaza policy Accusing

1:19

the administration of lying about

1:21

Israel obstructing humanitarian

1:24

aid lobbying

1:27

group demographic Democratic

1:30

majority for Israel Sends

1:32

out a memo assuring democratic

1:35

lawmakers that support for

1:37

Israel's genocide won't hurt them at

1:39

the polls But

1:41

in totally unrelated news an

1:43

NPR Marist poll came out

1:46

shows Biden's approval rating with voters 18 to 29 is

1:48

at He

1:54

won that group by 20 points in 2020 Date

1:59

Two of jury deliberations in the Trump-Hush

2:02

money trial, after

2:04

over four hours of deliberation yesterday,

2:08

Trump apparently offered Elon Musk an

2:10

advisory role on the border. If

2:14

he wins, translation, please

2:16

just give me money, I need

2:18

it for my lawyers fees, Elon, please.

2:23

France, Germany, and now some US

2:25

officials signal openness to

2:27

letting Ukraine use US weapons

2:30

to strike Russia proper. This

2:34

could draw NATO into the war, and

2:36

the US is a

2:38

part of that, two nuclear powers here. Hope

2:42

it's just posturing. Alito

2:44

refuses to recuse himself from

2:47

Trump election cases, no surprise there.

2:50

Federal regulators give Boeing a deadline

2:53

for a safety improvement plan. Hong

2:58

Kong court convicts 14

3:00

pro-democracy activists. Polls

3:05

close in South Africa, results expected

3:07

over the weekend. Mexico

3:09

will also hold its elections

3:11

this weekend. And

3:14

lastly, India recorded a temperature of 126

3:16

degrees Fahrenheit on

3:20

Wednesday, potentially the

3:22

highest ever recorded in the country. All

3:24

this and more on today's

3:28

majority report. Welcome to the show

3:30

everybody, it's in that majority report

3:32

Thursday. And it is just myself

3:34

and Matt Lech today, Bradley is

3:36

moving. You know, it's that

3:38

time of the month. Yeah,

3:41

we move every month. No,

3:44

not me, but like, you know, did

3:46

you know in Boston? I know this just

3:48

because my step sister lives in Boston. There's

3:50

one day of the month where like all

3:52

the leases start and they all move on

3:54

the same day. It's sometime in September or

3:56

something like that. At least maybe

3:58

the legal leases. But it creates a

4:00

completely chaotic situation and like, my stepbrother had

4:03

to go help her move and stay in

4:05

a hotel and the hotels are overbooked. I

4:07

mean, it's crazy. Moving trucks on all the

4:09

streets. Yes, and like they have to

4:11

hire movers from completely out of the city.

4:14

You're all booked on that thing? Yes!

4:16

Why does that happen? But at the end

4:18

of the month in New York, it also is the time when you

4:21

see a bunch of moving trucks and then when

4:23

people's leases are up. So good luck to Bradley

4:25

on that. I would totally be there helping you lift

4:27

furniture Bradley, but got this job to do. Oh,

4:30

we'd be there to help you out. A

4:33

friend always will hypothetically offer to help you move,

4:36

but maybe not in practice. Got to do these

4:38

clips. I

4:40

mentioned this in headlines, but just

4:43

wanted to read a little bit before we talk briefly about

4:45

the Trump trial before we get to some of

4:47

our guests. Two

4:50

more. Biden administration

4:52

officials have resigned in protest

4:54

of Biden's position on Gaza.

4:57

Particularly, this is, I

5:02

think, notable because they

5:04

are specifically accusing the administration of,

5:06

and this is from the Guardian,

5:09

not telling the truth about Israeli

5:12

obstruction of humanitarian assistance to

5:14

more than 2 million Palestinians trapped and starving

5:17

in the tiny coastal strip. Alexander

5:19

Smith, a contractor for the US

5:22

Agency for International Development, USAID, said

5:24

he was given a choice between

5:26

resignation and dismissal after

5:29

preparing a presentation on maternal

5:31

and child mortality among Palestinians,

5:34

which was canceled at the last minute

5:36

by USAID leadership last week. Just

5:39

sit with that for a second. He

5:41

was preparing a report on infant

5:45

and maternal or child and

5:47

maternal mortality among Palestinians, and

5:50

his report caused

5:52

his higher-ups to say,

5:55

well, you can either quit or we'll fire you. Men.

6:00

His quote is, I cannot do my job

6:02

in an environment in which specific people cannot

6:04

be acknowledged as fully human or were gender

6:06

and human rights principles apply to some but

6:08

not to others depending on their race, he

6:11

wrote. In another resignation on

6:13

Tuesday, a State Department official from the

6:15

Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, Stacy

6:17

Gilbert, sent an email to

6:19

colleagues explaining that she was leaving because

6:21

of an official finding by the department

6:23

that Israel was not deliberately obstructing the

6:25

flow of food or other aid into

6:27

Gaza. She

6:29

was upset about the report to Congress earlier

6:32

in May that we talked about that

6:35

basically danced around the issue and

6:37

pretended that there was some ambiguity

6:40

about whether or not Israel had

6:42

violated the Leahy law in that instance.

6:45

They didn't want to have to trigger

6:47

the Leahy law, which says that if

6:49

a country is blocking

6:51

humanitarian assistance, they should be

6:53

cut off from aid

6:56

at that point. So the

6:58

administration's report that they gave to Congress

7:00

just didn't address that fact because they

7:02

knew what the finding would mean for

7:04

them legally. And that's part of why she

7:06

chose to resign. Smith

7:09

and Gilbert bring the total number of

7:11

Biden administration officials to have publicly resigned

7:13

over US policy on Gaza to nine.

7:16

So Josh Paul, the first official to resign

7:18

said at least two dozen more have left

7:20

quietly without a public declaration. And

7:23

more and more of this is just is

7:25

going to happen if the administration determines Israel

7:27

did not violate its red line. They're

7:29

still figuring that out. I guess that investigation

7:31

is lost with the

7:33

World Central Kitchen

7:35

aid worker attacks,

7:39

the killing of six

7:41

year old girl Hindre Jab and

7:43

more. Those are they're all just

7:45

that's a backlog. You think about like why

7:48

we don't want Trump to be the next president?

7:50

And it's in part because of the effect it

7:52

has on sort of the bureaucratic personnel. And we're

7:54

already pruning the bureaucracy of

7:56

anybody who has a conscience during

7:58

the genocide. So. Basically doing their

8:00

work for him. So that's why you hear all people talk

8:02

about Fascism as a as

8:05

like a campaign issue. No, it's a it's

8:07

a bipartisan problem right now

8:09

that we all have to really confront

8:11

because you know It's

8:15

happening right now there's collaboration happening right now

8:18

I am in favor of people resigning in protest

8:20

to be public like this because it gives people

8:23

You know it puts more pressure on folks That

8:26

is the consequence of having an inhumane policy like

8:28

this is that you know This

8:30

administration could have had all of these good-hearted

8:32

people and now she line Josh Paul whoever

8:34

right who are trying to do good work

8:37

Yeah, I just have brainless

8:39

and you know bloody-handed people

8:41

left and there are but there are

8:43

still people that they need a job I get

8:45

it It's really hard to be without a job

8:47

in this country and they're trying to maybe rationalize

8:49

and do work from the inside But if this

8:51

many people are resigning in protest just think about

8:54

how many people internally are

8:56

disgusted Now

8:58

let's turn to Donald Trump on the trial as I

9:01

mentioned at the start of the show This

9:04

is day two of jury

9:06

deliberations. I believe Reporting

9:09

it right before we came on air Indicated

9:12

that the jury was trying to hear some testimony

9:14

again now before

9:17

the the jury deliberated the

9:21

judge gave instructions to to

9:24

To the jury as the judge does

9:27

but as soon as the judge did that Trump

9:30

apparently within minutes went

9:32

on truth social and Of

9:34

course is crying foul. It

9:36

is ridiculous unconstitutional and

9:39

un-american that the highly conflicted

9:41

radical left judge is Not

9:44

requiring a unanimous decision on the

9:46

fake charges against me brought by

9:49

Soros backed DA Alvin Bragg Like

9:51

just I mean you see

9:54

just the contours of great replacement

9:56

theory right there Soros Jewish backed

9:58

a black guy, right, in the

10:01

same way that they never

10:03

attribute agency to black people

10:05

or Latino people because it must be the

10:07

Jews controlling the person. A puppet master, not a

10:09

Jewish puppet, just a puppet master. Right.

10:13

Don't worry, I'm against anti-Semitism. A

10:15

third world election interference

10:17

hoax, he says, Trump concludes that post.

10:20

So that was right after the jury

10:22

gave these instructions. And

10:24

you saw every Republican candidate kind

10:26

of follow suit after this, or

10:28

not candidate, I should say. Politician

10:30

Marco Rubio was like, this is disgusting

10:33

what the judge did. And

10:35

then last night, Senator Ted

10:37

Cruz went on Sean Hannity's

10:40

show to express consternation about these

10:42

jury deliberation instructions. We'll give you

10:44

the real facts of the situation

10:46

after we hear him. ...

10:49

with Jonathan Turley is exactly right. We

10:52

now know to a virtual certainty that

10:55

no conviction will be upheld on appeal,

10:57

that the judge today committed, I think,

10:59

clear reversible error. These jury

11:01

instructions were nonsense. Now,

11:04

here's the bad news. The bad

11:06

news is this has been a

11:08

kangaroo court from the beginning. This

11:10

is a wildly partisan prosecutor who

11:12

hates Donald Trump, who came with

11:14

a political objective of going after

11:16

Donald Trump. And we now know

11:18

from these jury instructions that this

11:20

judge is every bit the partisan

11:22

that the prosecutor is. And he

11:24

knows this is reversible error. As

11:26

you noted, Ramos versus Louisiana clearly

11:28

held in 2020 that every element

11:30

of the crime must be proven

11:32

beyond a reasonable doubt, must be

11:34

unanimous by the jury.

11:36

And yet this judge says it doesn't

11:38

matter, not in New York. The Constitution

11:40

does not apply in New York, which

11:42

means if we get a conviction, it

11:44

will be reversed on appeal. But

11:48

The judge doesn't care. The Prosecutor doesn't

11:50

care. Nobody cares because this is not

11:52

about law. This is not about criminal

11:55

justice. This is about politics. This is

11:57

all about the press conference, the national

11:59

address. President Joe Biden is scheduled

12:01

to give from the White House

12:03

where he gloats. We've now convicted

12:06

Donald Trump. This is all about

12:08

November. We are watching election interference.

12:10

This is the most blatant case

12:12

of election interference that we've ever

12:14

seen in our country's history. But.

12:17

Everything seems to backfire and if you

12:19

look for example one and I've heard

12:21

different. takes on the on

12:23

the issue of the questions that the

12:26

jury whoa. Whoa. Where

12:28

are asking and they'll be read

12:30

back tomorrow. But I I've gotta

12:32

wonder, could those questions be rooted

12:34

in this agreement? in that. You

12:37

know if you're a room? Look.

12:40

Sean I'm I'm holding out hope by I

12:42

gotta say, I believe in our justice system.

12:44

I believe in our constitution. I believe and

12:47

I don't believe it or my daughter will

12:49

even or system or center. Audible I said

12:51

well beginning he can't get a fair trial

12:53

in New York. Moral law goes, not eighteen

12:56

Milan don't either And I stand by any.

12:58

didn't get a fair trial a New York

13:00

regardless of what the outcome as. Yeah, that's

13:02

a fact. None. Of that

13:04

this judges partisan and wildly unfair.

13:06

The previous judge was part of

13:08

center wildly unfair foul kind of

13:11

as the best outcome. Is. It

13:13

the jury acquitted. There's some common sense that

13:15

comes through Now as you note all actually

13:17

keep our goal is wildly democratic so they're

13:19

gambling. The sad part of since on that

13:21

jury who don't care about the facts in

13:23

law and by the way the judge gave

13:26

and such a biased view the law that

13:28

they get em twelve different series of the

13:30

crime and convicts that will be reversed. but

13:32

even so even if they don't quit one

13:34

is your can stand up and say I

13:36

will not be part of this travesty of

13:39

justice. I hope and pray that happens That

13:41

would be good for the country. If

13:43

they ended this ridiculous charade and

13:45

they let the voters decide in

13:47

November. Ah right, I agree. Well

13:49

thank you so much Squishy! Been

13:51

with us. ted cruz ask

13:53

that advocacy for jury nullification which

13:56

definitely is not politicizing the process

13:58

one whatsoever as he accuses all

14:00

the Democrats, and we know what

14:03

that means, in an urban

14:05

space like New York, they're

14:08

going to be the ones that are

14:10

biased in this instance. So what they're

14:12

basically claiming here and what Trump is

14:14

claiming and all of the

14:16

Republicans just followed suit with his

14:18

true social post that

14:20

came off the cuff as the

14:23

jury began to deliberate after these

14:25

instructions were handed down. No,

14:28

the judge is not saying that

14:30

the, let's rip up the

14:33

Constitution in this case for

14:35

a felony charge, you don't need

14:37

unanimous consent on the conviction. That

14:39

is absolutely not what the judge

14:42

said because if that were the

14:44

case, yes, that would be highly

14:46

unusual and illegal for the judge

14:49

to make that determination

14:51

basically on the fly to

14:53

the jury before they were

14:55

set to make their,

14:58

to deliberate and figure out the

15:00

facts of this case. What the

15:03

judge actually said to them in

15:05

thorough instructions was because the prosecution

15:07

in this case made

15:10

the misdemeanor of felony in

15:14

this instance, when it came to

15:16

falsifying business records, they made

15:18

it a felony by bumping it up to

15:20

say the intent with this falsifying

15:24

of records was to

15:26

commit another crime, which was

15:28

the federal crime of election

15:30

interference because that

15:34

was the way that the prosecution's

15:36

case was constructed. The

15:38

judge made the case to the

15:40

jury and said, you

15:42

don't necessarily need to agree

15:45

on the 34 counts on

15:48

the way that

15:51

Trump concealed

15:55

or obfuscated or Used

15:58

this kind of fraudulent. when

16:00

bookkeeping. Or. changing of

16:02

morning. You. Don't need

16:04

to. Agree on every

16:06

specific charge on the mechanism

16:09

with which he. Did

16:11

that? You just have to agree. With

16:13

the over arching charts, the over.

16:15

Arching charge of that on.

16:18

He. Was basically dead that they

16:21

were trying to violate the

16:23

election law through this fraudulent

16:25

activity. They made this this

16:27

case here in in Usa

16:29

Today. Basically that prosecutors

16:31

have alleged from falsify the records

16:33

in order to interfere with the

16:35

Twenty Sixteen Presidential election using unlawful

16:37

means they've alleged Trump use three

16:39

different unlawful means: one violating federal

16:41

campaign finance laws through hush money

16:43

payments to adult film star Stormy

16:45

Daniels. Ah, to falsifying

16:48

yet another business record under New York

16:50

law such as bank records tied to

16:52

former. Or Trump fixer Michael Cohen payments

16:54

a Stormy Daniels lawyer. And three

16:56

violating your tax laws Fares must

16:58

agree Trump use some unlawful means

17:00

to interfere in the election according

17:03

to merge chance that the judge

17:05

but they don't need to agree

17:07

on which means it was. This

17:09

is the quote from the instructions,

17:11

although you must conclude unanimously that

17:13

the defendant conspired to promote or

17:15

prevent the election. Of. Any

17:17

person to public office by unlawful

17:20

means, you need not be unanimous

17:22

as to what those unlawful means.

17:24

We're Marshawn instructed. But does the

17:27

verdict need to be unanimous? Yes,

17:29

Marshawn clearly stated your verdict on

17:31

each count you consider whether guilty

17:34

or not guilty must be unanimous.

17:36

That is, each and every juror

17:38

must agree to it. He said,

17:41

But. They're claiming said it was the

17:43

second part in which Mersch and

17:46

the judge was saying that. Ah,

17:48

The the jurors did not have to be unanimous

17:50

yet I would be a pretty massive stories that

17:52

were the case. But. They know this. Is

17:54

it. That mean they know that they're lying about this.

17:57

They know that they're lying about the mechanics of it.

17:59

But. That's gonna make people confuse

18:01

than that. their primary objective on

18:04

so. We'll. See what happens?

18:06

I mean. Maybe if this is

18:08

also amazing. So ah,

18:11

Issue that is. Recall that now that

18:13

now. Though.

18:16

We can we get to see Ted Cruz! To

18:18

suck up the Trump on a

18:20

nightly basis. Or daily basis. Apparently

18:23

you'll recall that National Enquirer. Ran

18:26

that story about Ted Cruz's father

18:28

being linked to the Jazz Kss

18:30

assassination which was false. And

18:33

David Pecker Trump's Die at The

18:35

National Own Or Enquirer was just

18:37

testifying in this very case that

18:39

Trump was and him are working

18:41

in cahoots to do caching kills

18:44

games, but also plant stories like

18:46

this one. So even that, even

18:48

with all of that backstory, Ted

18:50

Cruz still gets all. Agitated.

18:53

On air on Hannity to Protect Ah,

18:56

the leader of the Republican party Donald

18:58

Trump. I'm. So.

19:01

We shall see what the results are here,

19:03

but that is the deliberate obvious case in

19:05

the third g O P is engaging in

19:07

today. Or a

19:09

folks quick break and when we come

19:12

back we are going to be talking

19:14

talking to a doctor at the on

19:16

Ly dig the author of Women on

19:18

the Far Right Social media Influencers An

19:21

online radicalization. Barrett that. We.

19:38

Are back and we're joined now

19:41

by Doctor Every On Light, a

19:43

postdoctoral fellow at the Department of

19:45

Cultural Studies at Tilburg Universe, the

19:47

author of the Women of the

19:49

Far Right, Social media Influencers and

19:51

Online radicalization of yeah Thanks so

19:53

much for coming on Saturday. Hey,

19:56

thanks for having me. Of. Course so

19:58

on. The All Right in particular

20:00

is central to your book, as

20:02

you know the way basically that

20:05

the Far Right branded itself from

20:07

Twenty Fifteen Twenty Six seen on.

20:10

Film. A lot of our viewers are

20:12

familiar with these characters, but on for those

20:14

who are not what. Are the hallmarks

20:16

of the All Rights views? Ah,

20:19

what are the characteristics. Of the

20:21

movement as you. Have uncovered

20:23

through your ethnographic research on

20:25

the front. Yard.

20:28

So I mean I will say like a

20:30

scale back. So I started my research for

20:32

this book and Twenty nineteen which was at

20:34

the time when Be All Right Sorted started

20:36

to dwindle that the were to give up.

20:39

the All right is that I often think

20:41

about it as the political movements that helps

20:43

to bolster Trump's election and presidency. And in

20:45

addition to that it was. I. Mean it

20:47

has a lot of like a white

20:49

supremacist, the know, phobic anti immigrant views

20:52

and enough for news like. As.

20:54

With a continuation knows of sort of

20:56

like one of the ideology of like

20:58

the extreme Right arm but I think

21:00

what we'd all right quite a difference

21:02

at least at that time was also

21:04

just like how online it was in

21:06

terms of like resorted to see it

21:08

emerged on like forums like for Chance

21:10

of Reddit, even I'm and then just

21:12

a lot more mainstream right? So out

21:14

is it started to dominate places like

21:16

Facebook and Twitter you tube cetera. And

21:20

so when we think about like the all rights

21:22

in some ways look at St. Have. Disintegrated,

21:24

you know, sort of. especially after January

21:26

six on. But I mean, it's still

21:28

definitely there. In terms of like, you

21:31

still have a lot of the same

21:33

activists who are on social media and

21:35

sort of hoping to still both like

21:37

the matter crowd. So I'm in some

21:39

ways it's disintegrated, but it's just sort

21:42

of revamps. Ah, in terms of like

21:44

how we might see it today. right?

21:47

and i mean i when we

21:49

talk about the all right we

21:51

often trace it's origins back to

21:53

gamer gate and there's so much

21:55

massage any inherent in that scandal

21:57

on which is why your focus

21:59

on the of the far right

22:01

and the alt-right as well is so fascinating,

22:03

but can you take us to that moment

22:06

and kind of what Gamergate

22:08

was, how it branched off

22:10

into a very online political

22:13

movement or how you can see some

22:15

of the trappings of that

22:17

extended into the alt-right movement? Yeah,

22:20

for sure. So, Gamergate erupted in

22:22

2014 and it was basically a

22:24

massive harassment and doxing scandal against

22:27

a journalist who was writing about

22:29

gaming forums. And

22:31

that definitely overlaps with what we

22:33

would come to see as the

22:35

political movement surrounding Trump and MAGA

22:37

more broadly. But you're

22:40

right in this sense that we tend to

22:42

think about just these dudes who are chronically

22:44

online that are part of the alt-right with

22:46

its origins in Gamergate. But

22:49

the thing is like, and also we think about things

22:51

like Unite the Right at Charlottesville in 2017,

22:53

right? We also think about guys wearing

22:56

khakis holding torches saying you

22:58

will not replace us. But the thing is

23:00

I knew that there were women, particularly women

23:02

YouTubers who are really big within this scene,

23:04

but they just weren't getting taken seriously in

23:06

the same way that the guys of the

23:08

alt-right were. And I

23:10

realized maybe this is a strategic way

23:12

of presenting themselves, right? Like maybe they're

23:14

choosing not to be as violent

23:17

or as provocative in what they're saying

23:19

because they know that what they're saying

23:21

still gives legitimacy to the rights ideological

23:24

agenda, but it often slips under the

23:26

radar. So that's why I was like, I need

23:28

to write a book about women in the far right

23:30

because no one's really paying attention to them or

23:32

taking them seriously. Yeah.

23:34

And to bolster what

23:37

you're saying, I think when most people think

23:39

of the alt-right, they primarily

23:41

associate it with white men,

23:44

right? Because of those images

23:46

from Charlottesville and things

23:48

like that. But we know That

23:51

women have played a role in right-wing

23:53

movements throughout history. I Mean, whether it

23:55

be Phyllis Schlafly, that's a pretty infamous

23:58

example here in this country. You

24:00

know ah I obviously

24:02

other female conservative politician

24:04

throughout. Throughout. Time And

24:07

but. Particularly. The

24:09

way they play a role in this movement

24:11

is a very online. Role: So. What?

24:13

How do these old right

24:15

or bar right female influencers

24:17

present themselves? To their audiences

24:19

in order to candler them into

24:22

what they're they're selling Sometimes literally

24:24

know that you're actually right. They

24:26

are selling their Brandon and and the

24:28

Movement's I'm I'm in. A lot of

24:31

these moments started off as political commentators

24:33

on you tube or like reacting to

24:35

current events and I think that was

24:37

definitely the people around me sixteen when

24:39

he seventeen on. but then I noticed,

24:41

particularly during Colin a lot of Islam

24:43

and started posting a lot more. Lifestyle

24:45

contents are like on Instagram. For they started

24:47

posting about like Food blog. Or Health

24:49

and Wellness which really like mutated with

24:51

the anti vax and and some of

24:53

them jumped onto the queue and on

24:55

conspiracy train as well. I'm and that's

24:58

that if was actually really interesting right?

25:00

Because the Rich and this election season

25:02

I don't see them like over the

25:04

talking about politics that much. Are these

25:06

not like during the Twenty sixteen election

25:08

season. But third,

25:10

they're choosing to sort of showcase a

25:12

really different form a visual propaganda with

25:14

their content rights they're trying to sell

25:17

like what a traditional nuclear family looks.

25:19

Like like and sort of the every day

25:21

like post scene of like i'm making dinner

25:23

with my kids are i'm I'm gardening and

25:25

that in the backyard but it's still really

25:28

political and in terms of like you know

25:30

the message that they're trying to get across

25:32

and for this image of had or normative

25:34

families and apostle by answering to the overlap

25:37

more with like the try to i've seen

25:39

as long arm which many people don't think

25:41

it's very political but it's actually all about

25:43

like upholding certain racial. And gender and class

25:46

norms. yeah what is the trad

25:48

wife movement this is one where i

25:50

kind of have a sense but i

25:52

don't really i never felt the need

25:54

to to to look into it that

25:56

much yeah now i applaud you for

25:58

that piazza as i said So

26:00

travel life is short for traditional wife

26:03

and sort of the idea and I

26:05

mean the idea is that you have like stay

26:08

at home Wives and you

26:10

know if their children to be to be mothers

26:13

and they sort of like retreat back into

26:15

the domestic sphere And then

26:17

the idea is that like their husbands are the

26:19

primary breadwinners working in public facing jobs There

26:22

are very distinctly anti-feminist And I think this

26:25

is where you often see a lot of

26:27

overlap with the far right In

26:29

terms of like believing that feminists like

26:32

dominate and control mainstream society and prohibits

26:35

Woman and men from quote-unquote Exercising

26:38

like their natural biological femininity

26:40

and masculinity But

26:43

a lot of chatwife content is very

26:45

leisurely like making sourdough bread or like

26:47

knitting or crocheting It's

26:50

really more like you know, so living and

26:52

sort of against the Girl

26:54

boss or boss babe of a

26:57

feminism as they would as

26:59

they would allege it to be right So I doubt

27:02

many of these women have read any feminist

27:04

theory in their lives But you know, it's

27:06

just really like reactionary movement against

27:08

that girl baby into intersectionality I

27:11

mean, I don't like the girl boss feminism

27:13

either But maybe maybe we should give send

27:15

them some bell hooks and they'll they'll be

27:17

liberated I mean, I don't know I I

27:20

did see I've seen some of those videos of

27:22

like making gum For five hours where you could

27:25

have just made it in there take bought it up,

27:27

you know, CVS or whatever. But Yeah,

27:30

it is. It's interesting. How much

27:33

does that connect with like Christian influencers?

27:36

There's a pretty big ecosystem of

27:39

Christian influencers and they

27:41

typically portray Heteronormativity

27:43

as well. Is that a part of

27:45

this or is that distinct or sometimes

27:48

both? Yeah, for sure. I

27:50

mean, I would say these are separate communities

27:52

But there's definitely some overlaps particularly when it

27:54

comes to like certain influencers who might be

27:56

like religious as well as promoting a lot

27:58

of the trad content But

28:02

I think, you know, one thing, whether we're

28:04

looking at like Christian influencers or child wives

28:06

or like the extreme right, the one thing

28:08

that just always unites them is this anti-feminist

28:10

stance. And, you know, we also

28:12

see that in like the Manda sphere, for example, or

28:14

people like Andrew Tate. Yeah,

28:16

or Tim Poole, we covered

28:18

this yesterday where it's funny

28:20

because societal ills are feminism's

28:23

fault, right, in the sense where

28:25

women are unhappy because they have

28:27

to work. And so that's the

28:30

fault of feminism. But also men

28:32

are unhappy because of feminism, apparently,

28:35

because they're lonely and feminism

28:37

is also making women more independent. But

28:39

then also they hate that independence. So

28:41

it's just funny how both men and

28:44

female unhappiness is really just women's fault

28:46

in the end of the day.

28:49

Yeah. And like that was actually a surprising theme

28:51

that I found with my research is that I

28:54

was expecting a lot of these far right women

28:56

influencers to be radicalizing other women into the movement.

28:59

But I actually found that like, at least on YouTube,

29:01

they had a lot more male followers. I mean, one

29:03

of them said that she looked at her YouTube analytics

29:05

and 85% of her viewers were

29:07

male, which was like pretty astonishing to me.

29:09

Right. So like, and I

29:12

think they know that right. So they're tailoring

29:14

to that male gaze with that demographic. And

29:16

you know, they're talking about things, how society

29:18

doesn't allow men to exercise, you

29:21

know, natural forms of masculinity because of the

29:23

feminists. Right. And I think

29:25

they're really adaptable in terms of appealing to

29:27

both male and female viewers with their content.

29:31

I mean, I haven't seen our

29:33

YouTube analytics, but from my experience,

29:36

you know, political content is pretty

29:38

more male dominated. Right. But

29:41

this is not even as expressly

29:43

political, right, in the sense

29:46

that it's also about portraying

29:48

a lifestyle and influencing. Can

29:50

you talk about the ways that they

29:53

either directly appeal to

29:55

a male audience or do so

29:57

through showing, not telling?

30:00

Well, sort of both, right? I mean, like,

30:02

sort of on this, on this, like, superficial,

30:04

very visual layer of, of course, the aesthetic

30:07

is about, like, dressing extremely femininely, and

30:09

you know, participating in, you know, certain

30:13

household chores and behaviors that sort of

30:15

show that woman's place should be sort

30:17

of submissive to the husband in the

30:19

household. But then,

30:21

you know, we'll meet, they talk about sort

30:23

of the anti-feminist stuff, or they talk about,

30:25

like, how society is failing men. And I

30:27

think, you know, it depends a bit on,

30:29

like, the influencer that you're looking at. Some

30:31

are a bit more open than others when

30:33

it comes to talking about, like, political

30:36

or even social issues. You

30:39

know, there it comes across much more in

30:41

the sense of like, you know, aren't you

30:43

just lonely and sort of seeking that traditional

30:45

wife that would sort of give you

30:47

that, that happiness and sense of fulfillment. So

30:50

that's when it veers more into being

30:52

more explicit about their ideological views. So

30:55

I mean, you put an

30:58

emphasis on parasocial relationships as also

31:00

being kind of key here. How

31:03

do some of these influencers, and if

31:05

you don't mind actually naming them, I

31:07

think Lauren Southern, some people may

31:10

be familiar with, but I'd also

31:12

include, maybe she's not a part of

31:14

it exactly, but, you know, Chia Reichek

31:16

has her own little niche in

31:19

the right-wing movement. But particularly the

31:21

more influencer type women, you

31:23

know, what is, how do they attempt

31:28

to kind of foster these parasocial relationships

31:30

with their often largely male

31:33

audience? Yeah,

31:35

I mean, so, and also for those

31:37

who may not be so familiar with

31:39

this term, like parasocial relationships means that

31:42

audiences feel like they intimately know and

31:44

feel close to an influencer or to

31:46

a content creator. And so

31:48

I sort of show throughout my research, you

31:50

know, things about like certain posting behaviors and

31:52

I mean, we can go all the way

31:54

back to like the origins of YouTube in

31:57

terms of like sort of crowdsourcing suggestions or

31:59

people leaving comments on videos, like

32:01

that really interactive form

32:04

of like interacting with

32:06

their followers. But

32:09

then I think, you know, as a

32:11

lot of these women started transitioning more

32:13

to places like Instagram or TikTok, it

32:16

became a lot more about like posting

32:18

their everyday lives, you know, things that

32:20

seem relatively banal to us, but sort

32:23

of establish this much more like holistic

32:25

picture of themselves. Right. So it's

32:27

one thing to offer that political commentary. It's another to

32:29

be like, this is what I'm cooking for dinner. Like

32:31

this is like my household chores that I'm doing for

32:33

the day. Right. And it just

32:36

seems so mundane, but it's also part of just

32:38

like establishing this sort of everyday relationship

32:41

with their followers. For people

32:43

like Lauren Southern, for example, it became

32:46

a lot of like behind the scenes

32:48

filming while she was like filming her

32:50

documentaries or going on tours

32:52

and giving speeches. Right. So

32:54

like posting a video of herself before she went

32:56

on top of Carlson being like, join us live,

32:58

you know, at this time. And

33:01

I would say like this was definitely something that's

33:03

transformed over the last few years. Right. So

33:06

when these women started off, I'd

33:08

say in like 2015, 2016, like this was still relatively new

33:12

in terms of like kind of soliciting that

33:14

type of audience engagement in that way. But

33:17

then over time, it's just been building. So

33:19

that's become, I think, just part of like

33:21

the everyday forms of social media

33:24

interaction that we see. Well, it's

33:26

I mean, you know, influencing is

33:28

that right, where it's essentially an

33:30

advertisement and you can it's

33:33

non-traditional in the way where you

33:35

build up that

33:37

parasocial relationship with your audience on

33:40

Instagram or TikTok and then you're

33:42

selling yourself, you're selling your lifestyle

33:44

and eventually you're selling some products

33:47

and your lifestyle is mixed into

33:49

there. Right. And I think

33:51

it's a long game for then being

33:53

able to capitalize on it financially and

33:55

it plays on people's emotions in the

33:57

way that D'Andre for would be very

33:59

proud. And like, you

34:01

know, so like, what

34:04

are some of those products that they're pushing? Because I know

34:06

that some of these female right-wing

34:08

influencers have relationships with platforms

34:11

like TPU SA or

34:13

PragerU. Yeah, absolutely. And

34:15

I think monetization is for some

34:18

of them probably their primary form

34:20

of income generation, besides things like

34:22

advertising revenue on YouTube. It's

34:25

interesting because I started to see this

34:28

sort of the sponsors that they were

34:30

partnering with throughout different, let's

34:32

say crises. So for example, during

34:35

the pandemic, and especially at the height

34:37

of BLM protests, there was

34:40

one sponsor called My Patriot Supply, which

34:42

sells like emergency survival kits. So, you

34:44

know, like 25 years of freeze

34:46

dried food or water filtration kicks, very Alex

34:48

Jones vibe kind of kind of stuff. And

34:51

this sponsor was sponsoring several different influencers that

34:53

I was studying at that time. And

34:56

they were all pushing this, you know,

34:58

fear mongering rhetoric about like an upcoming

35:00

racial civil war in the US because

35:02

of BLM. So that was one really

35:05

big sponsor at that time. But then

35:07

it became a lot of sponsors on

35:09

stuff like health and wellness products like

35:11

skincare or beauty

35:13

supplies, right? And like, even

35:16

again, like when it comes to the influencer

35:18

space, beauty and wellness bloggers have long worked

35:20

with corporate sponsors as a form of

35:22

monetizing. But the messaging here was quite deliberate

35:24

in terms of like trying to sell both

35:27

an ideology and a lifestyle. So it speaks

35:29

back to what you were saying about

35:31

like creating that personal branding where where people

35:33

tend to, I think, literally

35:35

consume like the

35:38

politics has become commercialized now people

35:40

are literally consuming the identity and

35:42

and feeling like they're part of that movement

35:44

because they're literally buying products into

35:47

this movement. Right,

35:49

right. So we had

35:51

somebody write in and say, Lydia

35:53

Rose says, I'd be curious To

35:56

hear what the doctor thinks on alt right trans

35:58

women such as Blair White. And how they

36:00

fit into this is while and I guess

36:03

I brought up higher a chick earlier but

36:05

the the anti trans movement also being a

36:07

part of this as well and. It's.

36:09

That connecting to. Reinforcing gender

36:11

roles are as as these

36:14

women tend to do, I

36:17

mean I would say in general

36:19

trends representation is pretty marginal like

36:21

you'll fine varies few. Folks

36:23

who who are sort of visibly out

36:25

there in terms of like they're trans

36:27

identity. By and large it is a

36:29

deeply trend so back and and just

36:31

probably anti Lgbtq movement in general. And

36:34

a think it's really interesting as in

36:36

like Twenty Team Twenty nineteen I started

36:38

to see this trends this anti trans

36:40

rhetoric start to escalate amongst these. Cel.

36:42

Foreign doctors and ways that we're

36:44

still considered to be kind of

36:46

friends. But of course now we're

36:48

seems like a. Lot of fear

36:50

mongering around translator eggs. And and

36:53

sort of associations with with grew mean and

36:55

with perversion and sauce right the lights. That's

36:57

something. I used to be pretty friends and

36:59

and now it's become so mainstream. On.

37:02

Small D Democrat Rights and Have them

37:04

are our viewers. Have questions for you

37:06

and can you ask her about Pearl

37:09

and why she's so bad as the.

37:11

All right woman. Graft: What? What's this?

37:13

List: Psychos last name Perla throw

37:15

the U S E L Davis

37:17

the I'm ah Pearl yeah I

37:19

mean it's It's interesting because as

37:21

actually quite a lot of tried

37:23

wives who don't like Pearl ah

37:25

which which that he has you

37:27

might lamb and Tory choose to

37:29

inflammatory and like she also does

37:31

parts of the tried to community

37:33

right because like yeah I would

37:35

say like she's definitely more female

37:37

version of somebody like entertain rather

37:39

than somebody who's vehemently pushing for

37:41

traditional it's to be used. By like

37:43

I think she sticks more to like the

37:45

as a feminist stance on rather than like

37:48

say we gotta gotta go back to the

37:50

Nineteen sixties. sort of the morning

37:52

and married and I. Mean she can't be a part

37:54

of this face as she hasn't been locked down

37:56

at this point. Them in what to see? Vanessa

37:58

say. He got. I

38:00

think someone should google that. Let

38:04

us know in the comments. Yeah,

38:06

that's interesting that they reject her in

38:08

that way. I mean, maybe it's just

38:10

because she's like such a, she's like

38:12

the Rabbi Schmooly of Zionism where it's

38:14

like you're just going on to get,

38:17

to go on cable hits, but you're not representing our

38:19

horrible movement well. She's not married. Oh,

38:22

she's not married. There you go. So she can't be a part of the

38:24

club, I guess. So

38:26

lastly, before we wrap

38:29

up here, you

38:33

also talk about the recruitment into some of

38:35

these far right spaces, particularly via these

38:39

female alt-right influencers. What

38:41

does that look like and how can I

38:44

guess people identify if, say, someone in their

38:46

life is listening to these

38:48

folks and maybe going down this path? Yeah,

38:51

I mean, so when it

38:53

comes to things like recruitment and radicalization, I've

38:56

heard these women talk about so many different

38:58

strategies that they use, right? So on the

39:00

one hand, they might be appealing to young

39:02

women who are already tread cats, like

39:04

people who grew up in conservative religious

39:06

upbringings, and those are very easy targets

39:09

for them. But

39:11

for others, they talk about themselves

39:13

being, quote unquote, recovering feminists. So

39:16

they'll try to target women who

39:19

might grow up with really progressive

39:21

views and then sort of start

39:23

to feel really unhappy with their

39:25

life situation, again, talking about the

39:28

sort of anti-girlboss mindset. And

39:30

so for these far right women, they'll be

39:32

like, you know, I was like you, you

39:34

know, I have these really feminist views, but

39:36

now I'm recovering from that. And like, if

39:38

you turn to traditionalism, that is your antidote

39:40

to feminism. So they sell this

39:43

myth. And

39:45

for men, too, what they offer, like,

39:47

you can find a wife like me

39:50

kind of? I

39:52

would say for men, yeah, it's a lot of like

39:54

honey trapping, you know, it's definitely a lot of like,

39:56

you know, if you join our movement, you're going to

39:58

find a traditional submissive wife. I

40:01

would say it's pretty superficial in that way.

40:03

But they also tell young men, like, if

40:05

you join far-right groups, like,

40:07

you can sort of exercise traits of

40:09

aggression and dominance and leadership. Because at the

40:11

end of the day, these influencers are one

40:14

of the few female faces of the movement,

40:16

but by and large, women are pretty

40:18

invisible when it comes to the far-right more

40:20

broadly. And it's the men that are sort

40:23

of dominating the top of the hierarchy. So

40:25

they basically encourage young men to

40:27

join those movements and be

40:29

able to exercise that. But

40:32

yeah, the question about, like, how can we spot

40:34

the signs? Because that's pretty hard. And I'll say

40:36

that, like, I've been studying the

40:39

far-right for several years, and even there's times where

40:41

I'm like, is this actually far-right? Or is this

40:43

more just like this trad-escape

40:45

of fantasy content that I'm looking at?

40:48

And I'll have friends send me videos

40:50

and ask, like, you know, is she

40:52

one of those far-right women that you've

40:54

studied? But

40:56

I think ultimately, despite

40:59

the fact that we have a lot of algorithmic

41:02

amplification of this content, it

41:04

definitely comes down to, you know, identifying

41:06

what are people's personal grievances before

41:09

they turn to hate. Because

41:12

for a lot of the women I studied, they

41:14

talked about, like, being red-pilled, but then, like, losing

41:16

a lot of family and friends after

41:18

churning towards these radical views,

41:22

and how painful that was for them, right?

41:24

So I think that early intervention, you know, if

41:26

you see someone starting to post some

41:28

of those red-pilling content, you know, just be

41:31

there and ask questions, right? Like,

41:33

just be there and be like, okay, like, what's going

41:35

on? Like, why are you interested in this stuff? And

41:38

I think just that really stage early intervention, even

41:40

if it may not be successful at first, it

41:43

just shows that, like, people want to feel that

41:47

they need that consolidation, that they need that

41:49

attention and validation, right? So I

41:51

think that's just one really important thing to

41:53

think about. All right, truly last

41:56

question, because Morpheus writes in, and this is

41:58

actually a really, I am curious. curious about

42:00

your thoughts on this. Does

42:02

she have any thoughts on the intersection between

42:04

anti-feminist, trad-wise folks and American Catholicism? It seems

42:07

like there's a lot of overlap to me.

42:09

I think that that fits into the Harrison

42:11

Bucker speech that we saw a few weeks ago.

42:13

I'm not sure if you were following that. Yeah,

42:16

it's not an area that I'm totally

42:20

following, but I have write about

42:22

some of those overlaps. I

42:25

would say that actually I've looked

42:27

a lot more into Mormonism in

42:29

the trad-anti-feminist content. Because actually, some

42:31

of the top trad-wise influencers are

42:33

Mormon. And it's really

42:35

good because they rarely talk about religion. They

42:38

never talk about politics. It's all just

42:40

really this aesthetic, look at my family

42:42

of 10 kids. So

42:45

yeah, it's a great question. Thanks for that.

42:47

But I think we could go into a

42:49

loophole around all the different religious communities and

42:51

how it overlaps with the trad- Totally.

42:53

Yeah, but I think the Catholicism thing is a

42:56

little bit more, it's a little newer, right? There's

42:58

this kind of- Yeah. It's something emerging maybe that

43:00

was a little bit past some

43:02

of the research that you did. But anyway, the

43:04

book is fascinating. This is

43:06

tailor-made for our audience. It's called The

43:09

Women of the Far Right, Social Media

43:11

Influencers and Online Radicalization. Dr.

43:13

Evian Leydig, we will put a link

43:15

to your book wherever people are listening

43:17

to or watching this. And at majority.fm,

43:19

thanks so much for your time today.

43:21

Really appreciate it. Yeah, thanks for having

43:23

me. Of course. All right,

43:25

folks, quick break. And when we come back, we'll be with Kate Wagner.

43:29

["The Women of the Far Right"] ["The

43:55

Women of the Far Right"] We

44:34

are back and we are joined now

44:36

by Kate Wagner, journalist based in Chicago,

44:38

architecture critic for The Nation magazine whose

44:40

latest piece for The Nation is entitled,

44:42

Luxury Brands Are Buying Our Cities. Kate,

44:44

thanks so much for coming on the

44:46

show today. Thanks for having me. So

44:51

we've talked, you mentioned this in your

44:53

piece and I didn't even

44:55

know that someone else had said it

44:58

before me, the Disneyification of our cities.

45:01

I guess that was not coined by

45:03

me so I won't, I'll revoke my

45:05

trademark of that phrase. But

45:08

I mean like basically we've been speaking about this

45:10

trend for quite a while. This

45:13

desire I think by people

45:16

in power in our cities around

45:18

the country and internationally as you

45:20

write, basically to have our spaces

45:22

be theme parks for brands or

45:25

to go see a show or

45:27

something like that. And

45:29

your piece touches on this a lot about how

45:31

luxury brands are trying to buy up so much

45:34

real estate in our cities for them

45:36

to have basically open air malls. Can

45:41

you speak about this dynamic I guess

45:43

of how

45:45

these corporations are working to buy up

45:47

our cities? Yeah, definitely.

45:50

For me, what's really interesting is

45:52

the scale at which they're doing it. For example,

45:55

Leviton, which

45:58

are LVMH, which is their

46:00

conglomerate name, which I think is Louis

46:02

Vuitton, Moa Hennessy, has

46:05

bought up to 3.5 billion

46:07

euros in euros in real

46:09

estate since 2007. And

46:12

the funny thing about this is that this is actually funded

46:15

by its private equity arm. It

46:17

has stakes in a private equity

46:19

firm, which is like

46:22

really interesting, this dynamic between private equity and

46:24

land acquisition and things like, for example, the

46:26

wholesale gutting of the American retail landscape, which

46:28

is often done by private equity. And so

46:32

all these different dynamics at play

46:34

are really fascinating. And it's crazy

46:36

that this company, which helps mostly

46:38

handbags as in fashion, as people

46:40

know, have bought entire swaths of

46:43

cities. It's not just like, okay, they have

46:45

some buildings on Fifth Avenue and in Paris,

46:47

which makes sense, because those are already kind

46:49

of luxury hubs and have been for an

46:52

extremely long time. But they

46:54

what's more interesting to me is that they have

46:56

bought land in Miami and

46:58

Montreal that is basically at

47:00

a neighborhood scale and has

47:03

created from scratch these

47:05

wholesale neighborhoods that

47:07

show and demonstrate a complete

47:09

control over all

47:12

spatial processes, as

47:14

though they're kind of acting as a

47:16

real estate developer. And as an urban

47:18

planner, which is not a role we

47:20

typically think of companies

47:22

playing when they buy real estate, we

47:24

don't necessarily think of them as designing

47:27

or as like being involved in the

47:29

design process past like, I don't know,

47:31

the building scale. And so

47:33

it just goes to show you exactly

47:35

how much power and money such a

47:37

company has that they're able to do this. Yeah,

47:40

can you give people a sense of what

47:42

that control looks like when

47:44

they're able to have so much real

47:46

estate space where they're creating their own,

47:49

like almost park like structures or places

47:51

where they're brand, you know, people can

47:53

just go and be immersed in the

47:56

brand even more than I don't know,

47:58

going to crypto.com arena. or

48:00

something like that. I mean, they bought, these brands have

48:02

already bought up all our arenas and now they're

48:05

buying up our public spaces. Yeah,

48:07

it's really interesting. So there's two kinds of

48:09

ways that they're doing this. The first is

48:11

more of this old school 90s kind of

48:13

bill bow effect named after this museum by

48:15

Frank Gehry, which was kind of

48:17

credited with the bill bow Guggenheim,

48:20

which is credited with revitalizing

48:22

the waterfront and bill bow in

48:25

the late 1990s and early 2000s. And what

48:27

was tried, cities tried to

48:29

replicate this basically across a

48:32

lot of post-industrial parts of their

48:34

cities. For example, like Hamburg also

48:36

has a giant concert hall and

48:39

it's kind of a wharf area. And

48:41

so that's one way of doing it by this big kind of

48:44

gaudy building. I hate that

48:46

building. I think it's really terrible. I

48:48

actually, I like Frank Gehry, but when

48:50

you, I was in that building last year and when

48:53

you see it, the first thing you see is Louboutin

48:55

in big sparkling Paris Hilton letters. And

48:57

it feels like going into a mall for

48:59

art. It is so safe.

49:02

It is so dull. It is so

49:04

Instagrammable. But then

49:06

like the Miami development, then you're

49:08

really talking more of an open

49:10

air mall because for example, like in

49:13

their words in the company's words, they

49:15

control the neighborhood experience, whatever that means.

49:17

So which tenants can rent there. I think they mean

49:19

commercial tenants by that. And

49:21

of course they have this goofy AstroTurf

49:24

public art, which is not a substitute

49:26

for real art, which actually takes low

49:28

rents and autonomy and mess

49:31

to make. And so

49:34

it's crazy. They control like

49:36

the trees. I mean, they really are, it is

49:39

a mall. I think that's

49:42

the clearest way. But it's like

49:44

a mall that is public on

49:46

public streets. Arguably,

49:49

these kinds of things are

49:52

a kind of substitute for what really should

49:54

be happening, which is cultivating places where artists

49:56

can thrive because they can't in

49:58

cities anymore. The rent is too high. Or even

50:01

just like the city should buy up this

50:03

land and do place making if you want

50:05

to call it that like do parks Do

50:07

outdoor dining do all of this stuff It's

50:11

crazy that we just let these companies

50:13

and by the way often without taxing

50:15

them To basically

50:17

be kind of private Robert Moses's

50:21

Biddies um this is

50:23

what you were referencing here right Matt pulled this

50:25

up. What was the name of this again? This

50:29

image that we're seeing here. Oh Guggenheim

50:34

Bilbao famous

50:38

Artisan in Bilbao, Spain on the waterfront

50:40

very it was credited with the revitalization

50:42

of that city in a kind of

50:44

close industrial way though It's

50:48

unlikely that it was the sole contributor.

50:50

I think architecture always describes too

50:52

much importance to itself certainly

50:56

But yeah, they this is clearly their tactic

50:58

in in Paris that they're trying to go

51:00

for which it goes to show you how

51:02

much money they have and actually the crazy

51:05

thing about that hat that building is that

51:08

Even though it was reported to only cost a

51:10

hundred thirty four something. I don't know million dollars

51:13

Like it's more and more likely that it's an

51:15

estimated cost is nine hundred million Which

51:18

is like almost that's almost a billion dollars What's

51:22

the discrepancy well, why is there the

51:24

discrepancy and what's been reported and how it

51:26

actually how much it costs? Frank

51:29

Jerry's kind of known for going over budget

51:32

because his buildings are extremely complex But

51:34

it's not just that like for example according to

51:37

art net the

51:39

there's a Report by

51:41

the French Court of Auditors which revealed that

51:43

in the first 11 years of its existence

51:45

the foundation Louis Vuitton Which is the museum

51:47

in Paris benefited from five hundred and eighty

51:49

nine million dollars in tax cuts Or

51:54

tax breaks for them. Yeah, exactly. Oh, yeah,

51:56

basically like a corporate loophole

52:00

in the tax cut because they are going to

52:02

give the museum to Paris in 2062 and so

52:04

therefore it's

52:07

like seen as like a public investment

52:09

or whatever but I mean

52:11

I think that's actually really 589

52:15

million dollars in tax cuts

52:17

for basically just like a

52:19

glorified instagram pop-up. Yeah

52:23

on public it's on a

52:25

public park and

52:27

so you're really just talking about the

52:30

wholesale robbing

52:32

of the city coffers by this company and

52:34

then just kind of trying to compensate with

52:36

it by way of this building and be

52:38

like no it's okay like we did a

52:40

cool thing that we will eventually get to

52:42

the city but it's

52:45

really I find it quite gross. Oh

52:47

especially if it's on top of a park right I

52:49

mean we've been talking on the show about public

52:51

space being in in closed upon

52:54

and encroached upon by the city

52:57

by our cities for decades at this

53:00

point and I mean

53:02

there really is I think something

53:05

really sadly ironic about these

53:07

museums that are supposed to

53:09

be hubs of art or

53:12

hubs of culture being

53:14

a part of making

53:16

our cities into the out of

53:18

that disneyland type place and gentrifying

53:20

it right or or making it

53:23

so unlivable because costs are so

53:25

expensive because

53:28

cities are supposed to be where

53:30

art is created or artists come to

53:32

find each other and experiment and that's

53:34

part of what is like we

53:37

we we revere about artists in the past is

53:39

that they've been able to come to New York

53:41

or come to you

53:43

know Paris and and experiment and and

53:45

and do the arts but it's making

53:48

it impossible for people to even live

53:50

here in the name of what they

53:52

say is art which is really just

53:55

branded billionaire content.

53:57

Yeah exactly I think that

54:01

there is a real divide

54:03

between art that is kind

54:05

of appropriated for this purpose. And then this

54:08

is not an old thing, right? Like, you

54:10

know, for example, in the Gilded Age, philanthropic

54:12

foundations created museums and cities around the world.

54:14

And it was what problematic then as it

54:16

is now. The difference

54:19

is, is that like the museums don't actually

54:21

really these kinds of museums to me, like,

54:23

well, the foundation Louis Vuitton, especially, which is

54:25

really just like the things they have in

54:27

there, like Matisse cut out, you know what

54:29

I mean? Things that people already know, that's

54:32

really safe that they want to take pictures

54:34

with. That really is quite

54:36

a different approach to museum curation.

54:38

I think then even like

54:40

in this kind of Gilded Age sense of

54:43

just accumulating private collections and then opening them

54:45

up to the public. But this isn't it

54:47

really isn't public. When I went there, I

54:50

was really shocked because there were just

54:53

people taking pictures everywhere. And there's this

54:55

giant Louis Vuitton logo. And it's like

54:57

I've been to the Guggenheim in Bilbao.

54:59

And that is a that is a

55:01

very expensive museum. But it is

55:03

also a museum. And this

55:06

felt more like the vessel to me, which

55:08

was like a kind of real estate scheme

55:10

for taking pictures. And

55:13

I think that this is just

55:15

a Gilded Age capitalist concept that

55:17

was already entrenched in the way

55:20

capitalism works, that has just been

55:22

adapted to the aesthetics and

55:25

media landscape of today. It's

55:27

not new. It's merely

55:29

just the kind of tech age Gilded Age

55:31

that we live in now, taken

55:34

to the logical extreme, which is luxury

55:37

land making neighborhoods. Right,

55:39

right. And I wanted

55:42

to return to the private equity piece

55:44

that you mentioned at the beginning, because

55:46

private equity, and

55:48

commercial real estate are, I

55:50

think, contributing to much

55:53

of our the

55:55

it's a separate, I

55:57

guess, ecosystem from housing, but it does a

55:59

compassionate. on the planet cell specifically

56:01

in urban environment some when commercial

56:03

real estate is gobbling up so

56:06

much of the available space it

56:08

what is how is private equity

56:10

working in this real estate economy

56:12

to kind of consolidate

56:14

a lot of wealthy

56:17

a lot of money in the real estate

56:19

industry it's a definitely I think

56:22

that private equity in a lot of cases

56:24

a lot of companies either have their own

56:26

private equity arms or they

56:28

are highly invested in private equity

56:30

firms and hold like very large

56:32

shares of those firms and

56:34

so this is basically a way this is basically just

56:37

cash flow I think for a lot of these companies

56:39

the way that

56:41

we as people who live in

56:43

cities experience private equity is very

56:45

different than the way that capitalists

56:47

work with it for them it's

56:49

a matter of basically like getting

56:51

money and just just like taking

56:53

things that are already existing that

56:55

often are profitable and just basically

56:57

torching them for for more

56:59

money there's no kind of more elegant

57:02

way of putting that that is what

57:04

it does and so when we actually

57:06

experience this spatially we experience it as

57:09

store closures for

57:11

one like for example like strip malls or

57:14

in the like a dead mall or

57:17

or brands that are like legacy brands

57:20

that get completely gutted by private equity

57:22

like department stores for example that

57:25

just and it's just a

57:27

slow decline into basically abandonment

57:30

and so it's interesting this dynamic between the

57:32

kind of private equity that does all kinds

57:34

of shadowy things but this is just one

57:37

of them and the spatial

57:39

effect that that has on our lives and

57:41

what that money is used for which is

57:43

basically remaking the world in the image of

57:45

the rich it's a very

57:47

kind of I considered a very kind

57:49

of one-to-one Robin reverse Robin Hood right

57:54

hey from the rich to also give to

57:56

the rich like okay I'm

57:59

going you you talk talk about this

58:01

basically being the branded

58:03

Robert Moses tactic,

58:07

essentially, these conglomerates buying

58:09

up all of this public space. Can

58:12

you talk a bit about some of the effects

58:15

on people and

58:17

how that took

58:20

over places where

58:22

maybe there was a public park or

58:25

it was a space where people could

58:27

have a communal kind of connection versus

58:30

now this is a brand

58:32

for Louis Vuitton. I mean,

58:34

I can't even imagine like for unhoused

58:37

residents to the space where they

58:40

have the ability to just rest is shrinking

58:42

and shrinking as well. I mean,

58:44

definitely, I think that this is a very clear

58:46

kind of spatial class floor,

58:48

not to not to be

58:50

dramatic. But I mean, it's this

58:53

is how the world is working right

58:55

now, which is that we

58:59

see the erasure of

59:01

not only public space, but also just

59:03

like ordinary life. And

59:05

the backdrop of life that all

59:07

architecture provides. And what happens is,

59:10

is it gets completely smoothed by

59:12

these processes by gentrification

59:14

by over policing by private equity

59:17

by any of these things, like tax

59:19

cuts and cities that let corporations do

59:21

whatever they want. And

59:24

so what you're really seeing is the this

59:26

is a space of exclusion. I don't know

59:28

how like

59:31

that's the only way I can put it is that

59:33

this is a space of total exclusion. Like

59:35

if you're talking about these are brands that

59:37

market themselves on exclusivity on being for

59:40

rich people and like people with aspirations

59:42

to be rich are of course drawn

59:44

to that. But these

59:47

are brand these are not does not like Walmart or

59:49

any you know, whatever this is like, they're

59:52

creating spaces that are just so

59:55

totally for rich people that

59:58

are so totally signifying exclusion,

1:00:00

you are not rich enough to shop here, you

1:00:02

are not rich enough to visit. Like, I mean,

1:00:04

I think a lot of us, I didn't grow

1:00:06

up in a rich family. And so when I

1:00:08

go to these places, I feel

1:00:11

uncomfortable. Personally, I do not have Louis

1:00:13

Vuitton bag money. And those

1:00:15

places are not for me. But then it's one thing if it's

1:00:17

one store, if it's one street, it's like, yeah, that's

1:00:19

the rich people's streets. But it's to take an entire

1:00:21

neighborhood, and to transform it

1:00:24

in this way, to so deliberately

1:00:26

exclude so many people from public

1:00:28

life, even if they don't have to do it

1:00:30

with the, you know, the kind of, you

1:00:32

know, police baton, so they probably will. Still is

1:00:35

to me, extremely

1:00:39

disgusting, and only ever more

1:00:41

emblematic of just the absurd

1:00:43

degree to which income

1:00:46

inequality not only shapes our

1:00:48

cities and our lives, but

1:00:51

also just how,

1:00:54

how obvious it is, right? How

1:00:56

it makes itself known that there is a world

1:00:59

for some that

1:01:01

does not include most of us. And

1:01:03

I think that's, frankly, disgusting.

1:01:05

And I also think that one

1:01:07

of the things that is annoying to me

1:01:10

is that a lot of the times cities

1:01:12

do try to invite these brands by, you

1:01:15

know, when rents go up, they

1:01:17

don't necessarily do anything to lower

1:01:19

them. They are they get them

1:01:21

tax cuts, they do whatever they

1:01:23

they get on their hands and

1:01:25

knees being like, please, Lou Vitton,

1:01:27

come to Chicago or whatever. And

1:01:29

but the thing is, is that these companies have

1:01:31

so much money and have so much power that

1:01:33

they don't actually need cities cow-towing to them, they

1:01:35

just do what they want. And I think that

1:01:37

this, this phenomenon,

1:01:40

this these billions of dollars in

1:01:42

real estate signifies that they

1:01:44

can just do what they want. They don't need to

1:01:46

be invited. They can just they want to be on

1:01:49

Fifth Avenue, they buy the building. Yeah, right. And

1:01:51

that I think really changes the landscape of

1:01:53

the game. It's like, yeah, actually, you know,

1:01:56

why cow-tow to these people? Right?

1:01:59

Why? He. Can see when they

1:02:01

can do what they want regardless and I

1:02:03

think that far as an attitude we as

1:02:06

the public's need to understand and also as

1:02:08

a form of pushing back it's like itself

1:02:10

is has said city sequel so invite them

1:02:12

and if they. Want to be here. They will

1:02:14

just as a money to be here. Isn't.

1:02:17

Yeah. Exactly. It's even less the

1:02:19

sensible than when we give out

1:02:22

massive tax. Or herbs taxpayer money

1:02:24

to I like sports teams that

1:02:26

want to build a new stadium.

1:02:28

Because there's like a public there

1:02:30

is somewhat a com the of

1:02:32

a communal. You know,

1:02:34

collective connection around, you know, say

1:02:37

the Buffalo Bills? Which is just what

1:02:39

happened in Upstate New York. Ah but that

1:02:41

and so I you know I think is when

1:02:43

you give them what kind of money should say?

1:02:45

Well. You can't move and we own part of the

1:02:47

team. And that way. but yeah, I think

1:02:49

I can. You money to support seems like

1:02:51

you shit on the team and know to.

1:02:53

I totally agree, but I'm saying it's even

1:02:56

less defensible because there's not people who are.

1:02:58

Going. Out a protest the Governor's office as

1:03:00

there's no lose the time block. Him.

1:03:03

You know, in Albany or whatever.

1:03:05

Ah, so I. Know it wouldn't be

1:03:07

in Albany, but but data keeping. In

1:03:09

the same New York for this example.

1:03:11

But yes I'm anti white Kate A

1:03:13

year you doing break up a great

1:03:15

work over there at The Nation are

1:03:17

you can read at this piece called

1:03:19

a Luxury Brands are Buying Our Cities

1:03:21

and the rest of Kate Wagner's work

1:03:23

at The Nation. And for the link

1:03:26

to this down below and whenever wherever

1:03:28

people are watching this and a majority.f

1:03:30

M. Kate. Wagner. Thanks so much

1:03:32

for coming on the show that. And resume.

1:03:35

Alright, Folks, A Sovereign wrap up the

1:03:37

free part of this program and head into

1:03:39

the Sun Half where we. Will. Take

1:03:42

recalls. Read. Your I am.

1:03:44

Play. Some clips have some fun.

1:03:47

For the most part I'm. Not.

1:03:49

Was happening unless reckoning. are

1:03:51

we are with brooklyn ruby through an

1:03:53

eclipse or for patrons pitcher and accomplice

1:03:56

left reckon we observed gibbons on to

1:03:58

talk about you and phones and Liza

1:04:00

Featherstone to talk about AstroTurf, which is

1:04:02

a secretly

1:04:04

a neoliberal austerity

1:04:07

sort of boondoggle, which I didn't really

1:04:09

appreciate until now. Also, it has added

1:04:11

upside of giving you forever chemicals. Enjoy

1:04:15

your kids playing soccer out there this

1:04:17

summer. Not good

1:04:19

folks, this forever chemicals. patreon.com is left

1:04:22

reckoning to get access to that. Also,

1:04:24

we got Microsene Comedian coming

1:04:26

up next Tuesday, which I am excited about.

1:04:29

Please check out his YouTube special. It's free

1:04:31

on YouTube. Go watch it and leave a

1:04:33

comment saying, Matt Wexner, he just

1:04:36

feels better about me as a person. Check

1:04:38

that out. All right, check

1:04:40

that out folks. On

1:04:42

ESPN, we spoke about obviously

1:04:45

the conference finals in

1:04:47

the NBA and

1:04:49

the NHL. And then we also

1:04:51

gave an update on the NCAA

1:04:53

and the suit that they just

1:04:55

had to settle and what it means for compensation for athletes

1:04:58

in the future. youtube.com/ESPN show

1:05:00

for that. Hello

1:05:02

to Brandon Sutton. Hey, Emma. Oh, whoa,

1:05:04

whoa, whoa. You have the wrong mic input. The wrong

1:05:06

mic input. Hold, hold. There we go.

1:05:10

Those are

1:05:12

the bass tones we appreciate

1:05:14

so much from across the

1:05:17

Atlantic. I find

1:05:19

my voice quite annoying. That's not an invitation,

1:05:21

the comment that you do too. Although you

1:05:23

can if you like. I'm not, you know.

1:05:25

You're not, you're not censorious like the

1:05:27

rest of the radical left. I'm

1:05:30

not sensitive or censorious. Two

1:05:32

words that are oftentimes not

1:05:35

pronounceable to me with my subtle

1:05:38

yet sexy lisp. Um,

1:05:41

well, a subtle yet sexy

1:05:43

lisp. I like that. Oh yes, sexy. I,

1:05:46

I've got a little, I can slip into that too. So

1:05:49

I'm going to borrow that for the future. What's happening on

1:05:51

the discourse, Brandon? We have

1:05:53

a great episode for you out on a Patreon

1:05:55

where we discuss the most recent

1:05:58

strikes in Rafah by the Israelis. military

1:06:00

as well as a sort

1:06:03

of history lesson on Boeing and why they're so

1:06:05

terrible. Spoiler alert is

1:06:07

because they hire black people. Right.

1:06:09

Right. DEI of it all.

1:06:12

DEI must, DIE,

1:06:14

I'm gonna fuck that one up, sorry. DEI

1:06:17

must, DIE, there you go. Yeah. Alright,

1:06:20

well check out the discourse. We

1:06:22

don't have Matt Bender yet, but

1:06:24

check out Scam Economy and Doomed

1:06:27

and Leftist Mafia. We will head into the

1:06:29

fun half now. The number is 646-257-3920. Take

1:06:31

your calls and read your IMs. See you

1:06:33

there. Three

1:06:41

months from now, six months from now, nine months from

1:06:43

now, and I don't think it's gonna be the same

1:06:45

as it looks like in six months from now, and

1:06:47

I don't know if it's necessarily gonna be better six

1:06:49

months from now than it is three months from now,

1:06:52

but I think around 18 months out we're gonna

1:06:54

look back and go like, wow. What?

1:06:59

What is that going on? It's

1:07:01

not. Wait

1:07:03

a second, hold on, hold on for a second. Emma,

1:07:09

welcome to the program. Hey,

1:07:11

Matt. What is up? No,

1:07:17

me too. You did? Let's

1:07:21

go brand it. Let's go brand it. What

1:07:26

do you want to say hello? Sorry, this

1:07:28

voice is... Everyone, I'm just a random

1:07:30

guy. Oh, voice today. Finally, folks.

1:07:32

No, I'm sorry. We have a

1:07:34

fucking... Oh, wow. What's been

1:07:37

aired? Honey, from this. Uh,

1:07:39

you want to smoke? Uh, hey.

1:07:44

Hi, how are you? Good,

1:07:46

how are you? Good.

1:07:52

It is me. It is you.

1:07:54

It is me. It

1:08:00

is, it is, it is. It

1:08:03

is. Every. Fucking.

1:08:06

Day. What's on your

1:08:08

mind? We can

1:08:10

discuss free markets and we can discuss capitalism. I'm gonna

1:08:12

go start. I'm gonna go

1:08:14

start. Common sense

1:08:16

says of course. We fucking failed him.

1:08:20

So what's 79 plus 21? Challenge

1:08:22

max. I believe 96 I

1:08:24

wanna say. 1

1:08:28

half. 3 8. 9

1:08:30

11 for you. 3400 dollars. 1900

1:08:35

dollars. 5 4 3 trillion dollars. It's

1:08:37

a zero sum game. Actually you're making

1:08:39

a big one. But let me say

1:08:41

this. Whoops.

1:08:45

Yeah, Carl, satire. Sam goes to satire. On

1:08:47

top of it all? My favorite part about

1:08:49

you is just like everyday, all day, like

1:08:51

everything you do. I

1:08:53

think about it. Oh.

1:08:58

Alright, that was so fucked. Well

1:09:03

it's just the week came, we needed out, obviously. Yeah,

1:09:05

I'm not done. I

1:09:10

don't know. Oh, you should

1:09:12

know. You

1:09:15

just don't like to entertain ideas, any? I am.

1:09:18

I'm a question. Who cares? No,

1:09:21

Chet. This is a neighbor joke. I

1:09:24

do love that. Uh, I

1:09:26

love. Can I

1:09:28

get a joke? I'm losing it, I'm wrong. Uh,

1:09:32

I'm wrong. Where are we? Let's

1:09:36

go. You're

1:09:40

outrageous. What's wrong? Love

1:09:44

you, Bob. Love

1:09:46

you. Bye-bye.