Author of Awake, Not Woke Noelle Mering Highlights the Three Fundamental Distortions of Woke Culture

Author of Awake, Not Woke Noelle Mering Highlights the Three Fundamental Distortions of Woke Culture

 

Live from Music Row Thursday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. –  guest host Christina Botteri welcomed co-creator of the Theology of Home and author of the book Awake, Not Woke, Noelle Mering to the newsmakers line to outline the three elements of her book that define the woke culture and its infiltration into the church.

Botteri: Right now on the newsmakers line, I am so excited to introduce our next guest, Noelle Mering is a fellow at the Ethics and Policy Center. She’s the author of the book Awake, Not Woke: A Christian Response to the Cult of Progressive Ideology. Noel, thank you so much for joining us this morning on The Tennessee Star Report.

Mering: Nice to be here. Thank you for having me.

Botteri: Thank you. Tell us about your new book.

Mering: Yeah. So it’s published by TAN Books. It just came out a couple of weeks ago, and it’s really my research and interest in what’s happening with woke culture. And I treat it more or less like a religion.

So I go through its origins, its dogmas, and its methods of indoctrination, but then also the restoration, the way to restore the culture out of this situation. Yes, I’m really excited about it and eager to be talking more about it. It’s one of my favorite subjects. (Chuckles)

Botteri: (Laughs) Well, let’s get started. So what was the genesis of the idea to address this? Where did the idea for Awake, Not Woke come from?

Mering: I’ve always thought of been interested in the intersection of Christianity and politics and how that plays itself out. And obviously it’s a hot topic, and there are lots of differences.

The big topic I think I got really interested in the woke stuff in particular because I started writing articles about things that were happening in the culture and noticed a certain pattern that this movement that’s about social justice tends to be quite merciless and actually unjust ultimately.

But it really operates on confusion and sort of plays on a pre-Christian precept to walk alongside the marginalized and suffering, which is a true and good precept. But what I kept noticing is that it takes that and sort of manipulates that instinct and then brings something that not really just out of it.

And so that seems important and interesting to note and to try to figure out why the movement was acting this way.

Botteri: Wow. What did you find and what are the things that you discuss?

Mering: I go through the historical genealogy, which is a big topic, too, but rooted in Marxism and then neo-Freudism, and post-modernism. The central dogmas that I found to be driving this movement and uniting it are three fundamental distortions.

One places the group over the person to the point where the person is reduced for the sake of the group. And really there’s a lot of tribalism there. Secondly, it emphasizes the human will over our reason or nature.

So what we desire becomes the definition of who we are, even above and beyond what is rational or natural. Meaning, like natural law, an intelligible human nature is a bodily meaning.

We see this really acutely in the transgender movement, for example. And thirdly, it emphasizes human power over authority. It really defines any hierarchical structure to be oppressive, even the structure of a supernatural hierarchy.

And God himself ultimately finds to be the target of this movement, because there are three things that are reduced. And those three distortions are the person’s reason and authority.

And the woke which is ultimately three characters, just the logos meaning the mind, the reason of God manifests in the person of Jesus Christ, who is the author and authority of all. And I do think that he is the ultimate target of this movement.

Botteri: Something that I’ve seen over the course of several years now, but it seems to be sort of snowballing is a social justice movement in the church. And as a Methodist, I’ve had a tough time for a long time reconciling their pacifist stance – and that’s a discussion for another day.

But we see a lot of progressive tenants being expressed in the church right now, especially in Catholicism. If you follow the Pope at all, he’s basically a South American-Marxist.

Are we allowed to say that? It’s something that seems to be snowballing and gaining a lot of traction in the Protestant religion as well – the Protestant doctrines. Where is that coming from? If the goal of racism is to destroy God, why is it getting so much traction in the churches?

Mering: That’s a great question. The two primary targets of Karl Marx were the church and the family. Christianity and the family. And I think that there’s been a lot of inroads because Christians are swimming in the same waters as the regular culture.

So one of the main goals was to really break down the sexual morals of the culture. First and foremost, you’re attacking the father by making him unfaithful and by encouraging him to be licentious and follow sexual passions.

And then this turns women in, makes women distrustful because obviously family stability and cultural stability rely on the family unit. And it also makes children rebellious because a father is really kind of an icon of authority.

We see it in his deeper voice and his broader shoulders and his commanding stature. There really is an authority just imbued in men, and it sort of calls them to inspire something higher.

And if they don’t, then it really becomes abusive and just about human power when it’s not grounded in moral law. Once these things happen, social pathologies become rampant, and they’re in the church as well.

And I think we see that. Once our socials were wounded and hurt by all these social pathologies and the breakdown of the family, we become very susceptible to a replacement version of the Christian life and what virtue means.

And so all of a sudden we’ve gradually stripped at this narrative meaning of the family life, and the faith has become watered down. And then here comes the work movement, introducing this new narrative where all you have to do to become good is to agree with the ideology to fight.

There’s this boogeyman out there of oppression. They see oppression in everything. Every interaction is built on oppression and power. That’s what the ideology is saying. So if you can just fight this boogeyman.

And the boogeyman is not always the boogeyman. That’s why it’s powerful. It’s real sometimes. There’s real racism. There can be real misogyny. There are real instances of these things.

But rather than taking them to be incidences that you can point out and identify and try again, it becomes this invisible, pervasive, controlling dynamic in society. And so I think Christians have really been duped in a lot of ways into thinking that this is what the new way to become virtuous is.

It’s just to become woke. And all of the other normal traditional channels of virtue have been seen as being oppressive or judgmental or these sorts of things like old-fashioned. I think it really starts with a loss of human virtue and then becomes prey to tyrannical ideology in that way.

Botteri: Well, that’s disturbing. Os Guinness, the philosopher from Hong Kong, of the Ale Guinness family – he coined the phrase the Golden Triangle of Freedom and said that liberty is only possible without these three elements being the Golden Triangle of Freedom.

And you can read about this at the Tennessee Star with our Constitution series. And the three elements are faith, virtue, and freedom. Liberty cannot exist without those three elements there.

And so the question is, can we have liberty without faith or virtue? What do you say, Noelle?

Mering: No, it’s extraordinarily difficult. And this is one of the ways that you lose your liberty is by losing your virtue. Alexis de Tocqueville said that America is great only so long as she is good. And once we lose our moral goodness moral compass, then we can’t control ourselves from interiorly, we have to be controlled externally.

Botteri: That’s a lot to think about.

Listen to the full third hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio.
Photo “Noelle Mering” by Noelle Mering.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Federalist Author Jenni White Discusses the Five Ways Parents Are Responsible for Public Education Failures

The Federalist Author Jenni White Discusses the Five Ways Parents Are Responsible for Public Education Failures

 

Live from Music Row Wednesday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. –  host Leahy welcomed author Jenni White at The Federalist to discuss her recent piece which holds parents partially responsible for failing public education.

Leahy: We are joined by Jenni White, who has a terrific article at The Federalist. Five Ways Parents Are Responsible for Public Education Failures. Good morning, Jenni. Thanks for joining us.

White: Good morning, Michael. Thanks for having me.

Leahy: So you’re from Oklahoma, is that right?

White: Yes, sir, I am.

Leahy: And you own it. You have five kids that you home school.

White: (Chuckles) Fortunately, not anymore. I’m down to one homeschooler. I’ve finally gotten a bunch of them out of the house.

Leahy: And you own and operate a micro-farm, is that right?

White: Yes, that’s right. I get up early anyway. So that’s what you do on the farm.

Leahy: Is a micro-farm five acres or less?

White: Well, we have 10 acres, but, yes, I still designate it as that because we don’t have 200 acres.

Leahy: What do you grow? What do you have? Any animals?

White: Oh, yes, we have sheep. We have lots of birds. We have ducks and turkeys and chickens and lots of cats and dogs. People tend to leave dogs in the country someplace, and we tend to raise them up and cat.

Leahy: Do you have crops?

White: Well, we have a large garden. We don’t actually plant anything on a large-scale basis, but we just have a really big garden.

Leahy: So that keeps you pretty busy.

White: Pretty much yes. Especially right now. Although what’s going on with the weather? (Chuckles)

Leahy: Yeah, exactly. We like Oklahoma. Tennessee, Oklahoma, Texas, and Florida. These are states where liberty is still a possibility.

White: Absolutely.

Leahy: And I was very interested and intrigued by your article because it does say something about the duty parents have and the duties that they really have stopped exercising a little bit. The first of these five things that you say why parents are responsible for public education failures. The first one, parents believe it someone else’s job to educate their kids.

White: Yes. I mean, think about it. And I was that way, too. Even though I was a public school teacher. When my husband and I married we moved to a neighborhood because it had a ‘blue ribbon school’ which I found out later was kind of an erroneous designation. It’s kind of political. And we put our kids in it. And it wasn’t until then that I started noticing, even in elementary school, some of the stuff that was coming back about how Americans harmed Native Americans and about global warming. And I thought, oh, my gosh, what’s going on?

Leahy: This was back when? how long ago were you hearing about global warming from the school?

White: Oh, my gosh. That was all the way back in 2008 in my kids Elementary school.

Leahy: This is like their propaganda machines, aren’t they?

White: But it is. And I think it’s sad because parents don’t really understand. They think, just like I did when we first got started. These are great. It’s a neighborhood school. You can affect the neighborhood school. Well, I did try to affect the neighborhood school. I got on the PTA. I was on the PTA for four years, and in four years, all we managed to do the entire time was raise money selling whatever it was so we could get a computer lab.

And then after we got the computer lab, we had to get a gym. And I’m like, why don’t we get some good books? We need to get some good math books in here. What about Saxson math books? Well, they didn’t want to do that because it was all about competing with other schools and having this computer lab or a gym. And I’m thinking, guys, this isn’t what this isn’t the important thing here.

Kids need the math. I think parents are led down kind of a primrose path by educators and by school districts and by that whole kind of phenomena, I guess you could say of we’ll have a neighborhood school and our kids will walk and it’ll be great. And then they don’t really stop to think about what’s actually going on in the school.

Leahy: You said something very important at the beginning of this. You say parents have long begun to accept the brainwashing of Horace Mann that public schools were the repositories of all knowledge. Later, socialist John Dewey convinced administrators that public schools were to promote democracy by instituting social change, something parents couldn’t possibly do. Little by little, educrats began to convince parents public schools could parent and educate their children better than parents could.

White: Well, have you not heard people say, and I’ve heard this for years because I’ve been doing education research for well over a decade, and I go to talk places and parents will come up and they’ll just say, but I can’t educate my own kids. And I think, well, who tells you that you can’t educate your own kids? Well, the school and society tell you you can’t educate your own kids.

So we pay tax dollars into this institution that turns around and says, here, give me your kids. And then I’m not going to listen to anything you have to say, because I know better and you know nothing. And this is where we’ve got to put our feet down and just say, no, that’s not right. I’m the child’s parent.

If I don’t know this child better than anybody else, why am I turning that child over to somebody who doesn’t know them that well and expecting them to do as good of a job as I would in educating my child? Parents just really need to understand that just by the benefit of being that child’s parent, you’re the one that’s able to educate that child better than anybody else, whether you think so or not it’s just the truth.

Leahy: I think a lot of this has to do with time and money in this regard. When I was growing up in the 50s and the 60s, my parents I grew up in a little town in upstate New York, and the schools there weren’t trying to do social engineering. They were actually just trying to teach us how to read and write and do arithmetic.

And my parents had no worries about any indoctrination happening in those schools back in the 50s and 60s. But fast forward to today. Let’s say you have parents who are both working. What it seems to me now, the pressure, the economic pressures are if you take your kids out of public schools where now they’re being indoctrinated, one parent is going to have to stay home and there’s going to be less income in the family and they’re going to have to learn how to teach properly. I think that’s a big impediment. What are your thoughts on that?

White: In a way, I kind of disagree with you because there are ways around everything. In America, we’ve been conditioned to want and we don’t ever stop to think about need because we’re conditioned to think about want. I want the extra car. I want a bigger house. We never stop to think well, what do I actually need?

Well, there are many, many families and I’d even go so far as to say hundreds of thousands, if not millions of families that could easily downsize where they are right now and be in a smaller house. They’d still have two cars, but maybe do used cars or something so that one parent can stay home. It’s just that we choose not to do that because we don’t really want to.

It cramps our style. And then we make excuses for that. And that’s just the hard truth of it, frankly. But then even parents who, even if you downsize, can’t do that because for whatever reason, there are economic troubles and they just can’t do that. One of the great things about the pandemic and there was mainly one and it was this.

So many parents realized they actually could educate their own kids. And even those parents that were working did something called educational pods where they get together with other working parents and one day one parent would educate the kids and watch the kids. And then the next day, the next parent would do it the next day.

And so that way it was kind of a Round Robin where people got to work. But they also had made sure that their kids were at-home learning. And to tell you the truth, online right now, you can find all kinds of great classical home educational literature that is just literally an Internet search away. It’s simply not hard to do anymore. Back in the 60s when people who are starting out doing this it was impossible almost. But now it’s super easy to do.

Leahy: So you talk about pods, and now you’ve probably started the history on this more than I have. I think my recollection is that public education really began in the 1850s or so with Horace Mann. Before that time in America, little communities would kind of do the pod thing like you’re talking about.

They would ban together. They’d pull a little bit of their money, they’d hire somebody to come in and teach the kids for a period of time, and the parents directly controlled what happened. Do I have that right?

White: Oh, you have it absolutely correct. And the more affluent families would hire tutors and they would do it at homes and churches. That’s one of the many things that churches had abdicated in their responsibilities and one of them was they were a repository for learning.

There would be parents who would bring their kids there and the teacher would actually teach inside the Church. And we just don’t do any of those things anymore because we would apparently much rather in debt our property to bonds to create these new buildings for public schools.

Listen to the full first hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rep. Sexton Talks Cutting Strings Attached to Federal Money and Maintaining Tennessee Values in Public Schools

Rep. Sexton Talks Cutting Strings Attached to Federal Money and Maintaining Tennessee Values in Public Schools

 

Live from Music Row Monday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. – host Leahy welcomed TN. (R) State Representative Jerry Sexton to the studio to discuss the Tennessee General Assembly’s intentions to control what is being taught in K12 public schools and the catch of accepting education funding from Washington.

Leahy: In studio our good friend State Representative Jerry Sexton from Bean Station, Tennessee. Jerry during the break, we were talking a little bit about education policy. There’s this real disconnect between what the Tennessee General Assembly says should be taught in schools and what actually is taught in schools. The schools’ curriculum is leaning left. Big time.

Now the Joe Biden Department of Education, I don’t know if you saw this is making grants available to teach critical race theory and The 1619 Project, which has been debunked historically. Critical race theory is an effort to divide America and to tell a false history. The concept behind critical race theory is not, as Dr. Martin Luther King said, that we should be judged by the content of our character.

But critical race theory says that everything should be seen through the lens of race. My question to you is there are apparently, some state legislators who are considering, even in the last couple of weeks of the session of introducing legislation, maybe in a caption bill, you would know better than I how it would come about, that would prohibit the teaching of either The 1619 Project or of critical race theory in Tennessee K12 public schools. If such a bill were proposed, how would you vote?

Sexton: Ha! I would vote to kill it. To kill it, kill it, kill it. And I know that I have several colleagues on the Education Committee that are fighting against this type of policy. And this is what’s ruining our public schools. It’s not about education. And I say it all the time. I was only on the education committee last session, and I talked about this all the time that it’s not about teaching, writing, arithmetic those types of things. It’s about indoctrinating our children. And we must put a stop to it. We must do that. We’ve stood up in this legislature just this past year. There was a program to come out to go into homes. And I don’t know if your people talked about that.

Leahy: Wellness checks without the approval of the parents.

Sexton: And we were livid. And it’s because of the Tennessee legislature and some conservative representatives that stood up and expose this for what it was. And we got it stopped. And, Michael, until we have the backbone to stand up and say, no, absolutely not, Washington you keep your money, you keep your values, you keep your education will keep ours in Tennessee. And I’ll be happy in five years to show the difference to Washington. They’re not teaching education. They’re teaching propaganda.

Leahy: Yeah, it’s kind of bizarre that our K12 public schools have devolved into propaganda machines. But that’s the reality of where they are now. I have this little pet idea, and I want to run it by you. So K12 public education in most States is funded by about 40 percent by local taxes, 50 percent by state taxes, about 10 percent from federal revenue. With federal revenue comes federal strings.

And usually, they come up with all these stupid ideas that if you want federal money, you’re going to have to do X, Y, or Z and all this stupid stuff. So here is my idea that I’ve kind of floated around. Why doesn’t the Tennessee General Assembly pass a bill that says we are not going to take a dime of federal money for education? You can keep your money and you can keep your regulations and we’ll do it our way. That makes some sense to me. As a legislator, what do you think of that concept?

Sexton: Well, let me veer off into another area and it deals with federal money. On my way home last Thursday, I’m getting calls from my county mayors. They’re wanting to know we had two million dollars put into the budget that would go directly to these counties for them to spend the money on infrastructure or whatever they needed. The local people and mayors…

Leahy: They know what’s needed. If the road needs fixing, they know which road needs fixing.

Sexton: I have a little Cumberland gap. It’s just a small place right there on the Kentucky border. And the Mayor told me he said, we need some roads and we’re going to get $40,000. of that money and we want our roads resurfaced. He said I’m hearing that they’re talking about not putting that in the budget because of the federal dollars.

Here’s what he said and here’s what every mayor told me. Those federal dollars come with strings. He said I can’t pave my roads. He said, I have to do one, two, three, and most of them have to do with the Green New Deal or something like that. He said I need the state money because I can do whatever I need to do for my town, for my county.

But he said if these federal dollars, he said, I have to do whatever they tell me to do. And he said I’m hearing that they’re wanting to take the $200 million out because of all the federal dollars. And I said, not in the House. The House is fighting for you. And I said it’s my understanding the governor is fighting for you. So I don’t know what the Senate is going to do. I’m not in the Senate. But that’s exactly what we’re doing with education. We need to tell Washington you keep your money, we’ll keep our money and we’ll teach our kids Tennessee values.

Leahy: Will you in the next session, introduce a bill to accomplish just that?

Sexton: I would love to accomplish that. I would love to introduce that bill. I will be glad to do that.

Leahy: All right. We’ll track it. And I say that with a smile on my face.

Sexton: Sure.

Leahy: And you know why there’s a smile on my face? Because there are huge hurdles to such a bill.

Sexton: Oh, absolutely.

Leahy: The Teacher’s Union. The Tennessee Organization of School Superintendents, and the Tennessee School Board. They’re all going to oppose it. All of them. Because they want the money.

Sexton: What’s most important to us? Funding the teachers union in the large infrastructure in the education Department? Or teaching our students? what’s the most important?

Leahy: I agree. And I’ve talked to a representative, Mark White, who’s a chair of the Education Administration Committee. He was favorably inclined to that idea.

Sexton: Absolutely.

Leahy: At least at the initial stages. It is a tough political battle. But we’ll see how that plays out.

Listen to the first hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio

 

 

 

 

 

 

Former NYU Professor Michael Rectenwald Continues to Sound the Alarm on the Dangers of Woke Ideology and Indoctrination as Economic Collapse Looms

Former NYU Professor Michael Rectenwald Continues to Sound the Alarm on the Dangers of Woke Ideology and Indoctrination as Economic Collapse Looms

 

Live from Music Row Friday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. –  host Leahy welcomed Dr. Michael Rectenwald to the newsmakers line who is the author of 11 books, including Thought Criminal and Google Archipelago outlines how corporations are positioning themselves in ideological favor due to China’s influence in state economics in order to survive.

Leahy: We are joined by our good friend again, former Professor at NYU Michael Rectenwald who is actually an academic who thinks independently and has written some great books published by Nashville’s own New English Review Press. Professor Rectenwald welcome again back to The Tennessee Star Report.

Rectenwald: Hi, Michael. Thanks for having me.

Leahy: So woke capitalism. You warned us about this for some time. We’ve seen it now going crazy with the actions by Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred. He is a Harvard Law School graduate with no common sense that has decided to punish the citizens of Georgia because their legislature passed common sense, election integrity reform laws. The way to punish them? Move the All-Star Game from the Truist Park in Cobb County Metro Atlanta which is 50 percent black to 9 percent Black in Denver, Colorado, home of the Colorado Rockies.

Here’s what bothers me, Professor Rectenwald, to me that these four 500 executives and Major League Baseball Commissioner talking about the head of Delta Airlines ahead of Coca-Cola, they aren’t even looking at the facts of these bills. They are just kind of responding to political pressure and then trying to force the duly elected state legislatures in these sovereign states to change their policies. What do you make of all this?

Rectenwald: These corporations are actually, they’re not even caving to pressure they are the pressure at this point. And ironically, the laws that they’re moving the game over are more restrictive in Colorado than they are in Georgia. And furthermore, how outrageous it is that Major League Baseball is willing to play games in China where China keeps people in concentration camps and forced labor and brainwashing techniques are underway constantly. So they’re complete hypocrites. It’s outrageous. And they’re completely not paying attention to reality in terms of where the real oppression is taking place.

Leahy: You said something very important there. They’re not paying attention to reality. They’re not recognizing reality. How is it that leaders of many Fortune 500 companies and the commissioner of baseball are so disconnected from reality? How did that happen?

Rectenwald: Ideology, ideology creates a worldview that blocks out a lot of information and a lot of facts. It just shapes the world view, such that you see the world in a certain restricted way, and you don’t have a wider lens to be able to see other factors of reality. They’re under this word ideology, which is a form of socialism and socialist ideology and that’s what they’re looking at the world through this lens, which makes invisible certain elements that are there.

Leahy: Of the leadership, the top management of Fortune 500 companies in America today, what would be your guess as to the percentage of them that have this woke ideology?

Rectenwald: I’m going to say it’s about 95 to 99 percent at this point.

Leahy: I think you’re right. If we went back 20 years ago, what would that number have been?

Rectenwald: Probably zero to one.

Leahy: So it’s been a 20-year change, right?

Rectenwald: Right. A huge, massive shift that’s taking place ideologically in this country from what I would call American values. I don’t know what to say, to socialist ideology. Really it’s an incredible ideological paradigm shift that’s taken place.

Leahy: How did that happen?

Rectenwald: What’s happening is we’ve had tremendous pressure through academia and this ongoing indoctrination and academia which I’d say it has been going on for 30 years or 50 years even. But more intensely in the last 10 to 20 years. And I think also, frankly, I’m not sure to the extent to which the Chinese Communist Party is behind some of this.

And in other words, the pressure they’re exerting ideologically thanks to their foothold in our economy. So that’s what they do. They ingratiate everyone to them by virtue of getting an economic stronghold, and then they start to perpetuate their ideology on the rest of the world. This is what they’re doing with their One Belt One Road Initiative. And they’re doing it in the United States vis a vis economic ties.

Leahy: Your suspicion is one I share. Getting the evidence for it, of course, will take a little bit of time. But I share that suspicion about the influence of the Chinese Communist Party on the thoughts of leadership and America’s Fortune 500 companies. What is to be done? How do we move that number from 95 to 99 percent woke among America’s Fortune 500 executives back down towards something manageable?

Rectenwald: I tell you what, I’m not sure it will work through some sort of reverse ideological indoctrination. What’s going to happen is the economy is going to suffer tremendously because this is all based on bad economics first of all. And we’re going to undergo this continues some serious cataclysms economically, and this could wake people up. Sometimes it takes some sort of a catastrophe for people to wake up because they can’t see outside of their blinders. So I’m afraid if it’s not going to be through reverse engineering, the ideological indoctrination, it may have to come through some economic problems.

Leahy: So what would be the economic problems resulting from the woke ideology of Fortune 500 executives?

Rectenwald: Well, what it is is it is a state-enforced. What they’re doing is they’re ingratiating themselves to the state because they believe the state will be the main means by which they’re going to make it economically, only those favored corporations. So as long as the state is dishing out all the money, which is what’s happening, then you’re going to have these companies beholden to the state in terms of their beliefs so that they’re in accord with what’s happening. And since we have a fully Democratic-run government, this is what afoot.

They’re providing all this money by printing it endlessly. What will happen is we’ll get into severe inflation at some point. And, you know, the Chinese economy is only functioning because we had a U.S. market to buy their goods. And if they make this such that so this could never really work long term. You can’t have the state being the main source of economic growth. It won’t work. What will happen is the economy will crash, and then you have to see that the market itself has to be the main driver. And that’s what we’re going to get into.

Leahy: When you see the economy crash, though, won’t the Fortune 500 companies be in a stronger position than, say, mid-size companies and small businesses?

Rectenwald: Absolutely. And that’s part of the whole, unfortunately, I don’t want to call the plan, but that’s the setup. This favors large-scale corporations over small businesses that are being as we’ve seen through the Coronavirus response have been obliterated. We’ve lost maybe 50 percent of small businesses over this crisis.

And it’s favoring these large corporations. And unfortunately, they may see the solution as more bailouts from the government. But at some point, this money is not going to mean anything, because if you keep printing money, the greater the supply, the cheaper it is, the less it’s worth. And so likewise, it’s inflationary. There’s no way around it.

Leahy: Professor Rectenwald, what you’re saying makes common sense. Last question for you. I appreciate your time this morning. How has your message been received?

Rectenwald: Well, outside of I would say, alternate type sources of news it’s not being received at all. I can’t get it across because you can’t break into the mainstream legacy media with this kind of message. They’re all down with this new monetary policy that you can just print money endlessly and suppose that things are going to work out when the facts of economics just tell you that’s not true and ideologically. You just can’t get across because they just peg you as some sort of a right-wing nut case instead of paying attention to what you’re saying. We’re in precarious conditions, and they’re on shaky ground.

Leahy: Well, our listeners, I can tell you this Professor Rectenwald are glad to hear your message and come back again and give more details on it as this continues. Thanks for joining us today.

Rectenwald: Thanks for having me. My pleasure.

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio.
Photo “Michael Rectenwald” by Michael Rectenwald.