posting on the alex simon show, and i'll be speaking to guess in the world, the politics, sport, business and show business. i'll see you then in the with the hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle . much of history is about patterns that are ebbs and flows of political passions. most of the time, these passions are negotiated through compromise. other times there is people violence and even separation. the idea of succession today is not far fetched. we are witnessing a cultural session and separation could go even further. the,

the cross talking session, i'm joined by my guess, daniel is our new york. he is a journalist and author of 3 books on the us constitution. and in toronto, we have arthur claire. oh, he is a liberty advocate and freelance editor, right gentleman close to the rules and that means he can jump in anytime you want. and i always appreciate, daniel, let me go to you 1st. i mean, we hear new civil war, cultural civil war culture war has been a while. that's been with us for awhile. and we have a president of the united states is constantly invoking. this is vito as bad as it was before the civil war. and you know, we have, it's almost like a battle him right now. i mean, it's this high per billy because when i hear it, it sets everybody off on all sides. go ahead, daniel. no, i don't think it's really hyperbole. i think it's really in certain ways, biden is quite accurate. what we saw in the years leading up to the civil war and

18. 61 was a very small minority of southern large scale southern slaveholders, really only a few 1000 people in all were able to use their constitutional advantages to leverage their power over the government as a whole. and consequently, what happened in $1861.00 is that the northern masses rose up and revolt and essentially cast off the minority dictatorship. and what we're seeing now is something oddly similar, where the republicans are using their constitutional advantages to gain an edge on the what is clearly the democratic, both with a capital d and small d majority. as they tried to, you know, to bend the government to their will as is their right. and the, the republicans are using the electoral college, the supreme court the, the standard filibuster, etc. as techniques to frustrate the democratic will. and that is leading to huge,

a huge build up and anger and frustration on both sides of the aisle. it's why we had january 6, for example. and while will undoubtedly will have similar russian in the years to come. okay, well that, that when you say it's really quite interesting, i hadn't really thought about it that way. arthur a bit, but these are institutions that are known and have been accepted. okay. and i've always said, we don't like the electoral college. let's have a discussion about it and let's vote on it. ok. the same thing with the philip, with all of these things here. and if you look at a lot of the things that daniel just said they don't have majority and support in the country. ok. so again, this is where the tension is here. i understand the argument that daniel is making, but the institution, the lay of the land, the rules are known to everyone. if you can succeed, then you know you want to change your like pack the quarter, something like that. but this,

the reason why we're talking about these things is because the, there's so much tension building up and it's mostly around culture. daniel's right situational, but the culture is in your face, and this is what is a motive with people here. and i find, you know, some of the things that are being said now on cable and in the broad sheets in the opinion, pages is something that i wouldn't even imagine leaky by 67 years ago. go ahead, arthur. yeah, you're absolutely right. i think it's, it's interesting because it's been this divide between kind of the elite, the coastal ally on your side and middle america for a long time. there's been a growing with a cultural rift. and like you said before, the culture wars have been with us for a very, very long time as well. but it seems like now what's happening is, you have, i would say, particularly from the left, the left has the majority of institutional power and has held that for a long time, even when the republican government or public incentives like with the 2016

election. you have a lot of in build kind of bureaucratic power as well as i mean media and et cetera, which to shape a lot of perception. and i think one of the biggest things i actually didn't expect to kind of say this, but one of the biggest things that that's not being done is something that we hear so much about which is empathy and actually listening to the actual citizens. yep. what, what is it that people want? because i would, i would venture to say that the majority doesn't want what's going on on either side. they want in america, they love, they want to flag, they can rally around. so that's, that, that would be where i completely aren't. that's a really interesting point. i mean, and then, i mean, it depends on where, what news outlets are you watch or what you read. because, you know, the, this whole debate about critical race theory that is that the, the writers using a lot and then you know, we have the olympic games going on. now how you respect or disrespect the flag,

you know, i sense of unity isn't there that we from what i can see here. okay. and it's, and that certainly changed dramatically. daniel, let me go back to you kind of pull the thread from an arthur just said here, you know, that there is a lot of that left does have so much institutional control, like the academy, the media, things like this here. and a lot of conservative people feel very much under siege. do you think it's fair that the is that it would legitimate gentlemen feeling to have being undersea? go ahead. daniel. no, no, it's ridiculous. it's absolutely ridiculous. first of all, the police conservative control the supreme court. they, they have a great advantage in the electoral college which on which gives access way to under populated rural states like why owning or the dakotas. they have. they have a senate on their side, which essentially gives the same number of votes to california as it does to

wyoming republican wyoming. ave, wyoming has literally 170 the california population. and they have the syllabus, which allows 40 senators representing as little as 11 percent of the u. s. population to veto any bill they like. so what america is suffering from is a minority dictatorship. it and that dictatorship is baked into a 234 year old constitution, which thanks to a completely dysfunctional amending clause, is effectively unchangeable. so, so that's what's causing the, this, the tumbled, the majority wants to rule majority has a right to rule, but the majority is not allowed to rule due to an 18th century law dating from the age of powdered wigs and teeth. it's really a matter of russia the same at the same government as it had under a pastor and the great well,

i would not want to live on under that government. okay. you make very fair points . but, you know, arthur, you know, until the filibuster was a problem for the democrats. they used it all of the time. ok, so i, you know, and plus, you know, daniel may be right. and i think technically he is right here about how the electoral college works. but arthur, that's what the you need to 70 to win. that's what you need to 70. that's all that really matters here. the, what am i keep stressing the point, the rules of the game are before you, everybody know, is you need to 70. now if that's right or wrong, daniel's got a good argument there, but that's where we stand right now. so i, i, so i get really frustrated when you don't get to 70 for your candidates that we don't like the electoral college. it seems to me that's kind of reduction. that's go ahead arthur. well, yeah, to address that point. i'm not a constitutional scholar. so i don't want to go to, to on constitutional history necessarily. but from my understanding,

the whole point of that system as it was, was to make sure that each state which kind of was like, almost like a country and a union sort of like you may be a bad comparison, but similar would have equal representation when it came to law making so you couldn't have one state with 10 times the population dictating to the rest of the country. what they can account do, especially because one of the biggest problems of that kind of centralized authority is california doesn't know what goes well in wisconsin. wyoming, or any of those places. and i understand the frustration would be, well, hey, we're a big state, we get to do what we want or we should get to do we want. and these little guys over here blocking us. but from a concerted perspective, sometimes that's the best way to do things is to make sure that it goes even sometimes excruciatingly slow. make sure you're not pulling up fences that have a reason to be there. yes, you want to avoid the tyranny of the majority. i think that was, would be that they founding part of their side of my but we're,

we're kind of going afield. what i want to talk about is go back to the culture wars, the secession and things like that. you know, daniel, i think you would agree with me, but may be the very, of course, language. you mean rival, you have a rival, you have an opponent, now we have enemies. ok. and both sides are demonizing. the other, and my point is always been, is that sometimes you, you know, some things you say are almost impossible to take back. and i always caution people . you really want to say that if you want to continue the conversation, you think, you know what i'm getting. i go ahead, daniel, you know, and i think was an 1856 or 57, a member of the house. nearly beat to the yes. yeah. a member of the senate on the floor of the senate where they wouldn't came. so you know, so things haven't quite reached that, that, that point. all those they did, we step 1, january 6th, actually if they, if the mob had gotten their hands on nancy pelosi or mike or alexandria castillo cortez. they might very well have killed them. be frank. but you know,

but an 861. the great majority of the population wanted to abolish slavery, but the, the stranglehold exerted by the southern slave owners prevented them from doing doing so. now and therefore they rose up in frustration and now 150 years later or so. the great majority wants to make fundamental changes and a well entrenched minority is protecting them. so we're seeing the same, the same pressures are, you know, building and you know, and, and this time around. but, you know, it's not going to, it's not going to turn into outright the session where the, where the states actually pull away. but as you point out, it's leading to the session by other means cultural, secession, political, political succession, the, you know, the country dividing up the 2 separate arm camps. right? you know, like a couple of scorpions and a bottle and the effects are poisonous, but they're poisonous because there is no possibility of

a democratic small de resolution. that is the whole problem. and you know, and you say you say the rules, the rules, the rules, the rules are what they are. but after 234 years, americans should have a right to vote democratically to change the rules if they wish. and they have no such right? well, if they say that there's certainly a mechanism to change things. it's really hard. and i said it was, i'm, it was meant to be what we've had numerous new amendments to the constitution. hang on to that thought. we're going to go to a short break, and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on concession stay with our team. the i choose

. ah, me only one main thing is important or not as an internationally speaking, that is a nation's not allowed to do anything. all the master races and then you have the mind, the nation. so the slave, the americans, brock obama, and others have had a concept of american exceptionalism. international law exist as long as it serves the american interest. if it doesn't, it doesn't exist. like turning those russian enter this dangerous go. you man, that wants to take over the world. that was a culture strategy. so i'm going to love it on your own. i v i v. i not

leashed to austin one and tablet block nato could. it's our we move east. the reason us had gemini is dangerous. is it the, the sovereignty of other countries? the exceptionalism that america uses and it's international war planning is one of the greatest threats to the populations of different nations. if nato, what is founded shareholders in the united states and elsewhere in larger companies would lose millions and millions more business and businesses good. and that is the reality of what we're facing, which is fashion rather driven by shaped banks control those in

the me ah, dares think me we dare to ask me . ah ah ah, welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter la belle, to remind you were discussing the session with me. okay, go back to arthur in toronto. i'm in full agreement with daniel has to say about a democracy. democrats with a small the. you have no argue. we have

a lot of arguments, but i know where you're coming from and it's coming from a good place. ok. but arthur, the other side of the coin is minority writes as well. okay. and i will disagree with with daniels. i think a lot of conservatives, a lot of people in the g o p, do feel very much under siege with the, with the current administration and some of the things that they want to do. ok and, and that's their right to do it. ok. but, you know, smearing them is deplorable in, you know, in interaction is, i don't think is helpful. i think it's very unhelpful, and i think it will lead in a very bad place because it polarizes people even more. i mean, having, you know, patriotic americans being called says, insurrection is a, is an amazing upfront. okay. and i mean, they're not, they're not taking it very well. and daniel brought up january 6, we can dive into that too. but what about the rights of the minority? go ahead, arthur. well matched exactly at i'm all due respect, daniel,

you're talking about a majority. you being blocked by minority and maybe within the political institution. that's the case. maybe within congress and senate. that's the case right now. i would be very curious to see the actual numbers of americans hold to see if they support a lot of this stuff. because the consensus from where i'm standing from the people i know, and obviously that's not a full poll of every american, but most people from all walks lights and all political standpoints are opposed to the sort of bar let extremism that's captured pretty much every institution. and you can go from corporate, the corporate world to the church, to the government, to the f b i to the r s who were targeting conservatives. this is not just a media smear, it's more than that. it goes deeper than that. and i think that a lot of this pushback politically, from the less the minority conservatives that are there is their attempt to legally stand up against that push. it's,

there are a lot of people who are right now thinking, you know, what if it keeps going this way there will need to be an actual america because what's being pushed is not american. danny, how do you respond to that? because i think there's a lot of people in the country that feel that way you have these, you know, again and again, it's all about perceptions and your own values here. but, you know, i look at, you know, they meet the dropping charges against governor an investigation against governor cuomo in the nursing home. incidentally, the, and the pandemic conveniently not. you know, curious about hunter by, you know, in his story which, you know, it's coming out more and more. i mean, there is this perception and then you have this palletization of the military, which is, you know, that's kind of a bash of red, white and blue mom and apple pie. you may be like or dislike it, but that's kind of an institution that we didn't touch. and now it seems like it's

really intensely political. this is what i'm getting a, get a, getting about what this kinda defeats thing here. also, you know, what's going on in schools. i mean, do parents actually know what's going on? they learned a lot because of locked down. so, i mean, you know, there's this sense here that these ideas that are being push may not be majority, marian, but they certainly have the ideas of people in power. go ahead down to bear even the idea of insurrection as that title that it is, is, would be politicized things. sorry. go ahead. daniel. greg jumped ahead. that's fine. i mean, yeah, i mean, i mean both sides have their grievances. i mean for every, for every complaint by the right, i can cite 10 complaints by the, by the left which you know which the left leaves and just as passionately and justice fervently. but the point is, and it's and then was throwing around the ward majority. and i believe that ultimately democracy rests on majority rule. we can discuss the question of

minority rights and what that means, etc. but ultimately majority democratic rule is the driving force behind democracy . if you have 25 people vote and 13 want one, option 12 want the other well, the 30 and then when that's simply the way it works and but the problem in america is we don't have that. we have a system of minority rule upon minority rule, neither side has the power and consequently everyone's going bonkers as a consequence. they're more and more frustrated. i said before i broke the image of a 2 scorpions in a bottle, and that's exactly what we're seeing. so, i mean, so america needs effective majority democratic rule and a can't get it. what you know, arthur, correct me. i'm in canada. got a new constitution in 1986 that correct? yeah. so i mean, and have canada fall apart. is canada to be on. the constitution holds almost no

weight and canada, and not, not the same kind of way, but catalyst though canada, that can is still a well functioning society infected it's orderly mess and democratic nature are the envy of americans. you know? so all america needs is the same thing that, that, that canada got 25 years ago. i mean, it needs a new plan of government, a new plan of government, which is democratically decided upon by the majority acting in a democratic need. that's all i'm saying. it's very simple and we don't have that we're laboring january, i think we're going a little bit at cross purposes because i think arthur and i are agreeing with you on some things but and you and you're talking about the institutional process here . i'm. i'm trying to get into the values one, and this is what you said, you know, if you have 25 people and 13 people feel one way you know too bad for the 12. but what if it's something, you know, like, like abortion or something like,

transgender rights are these kind of things. there were people to say, my value, i have a conflict here. ok, that's what i'm trying to get out here. because we do see a growing separation, a culturally and socially, and the point of the program is, could it gets so divided that it would end up going into the political realm. that's why i'm calling the program secession. you've arthur, you want to pick up that one and i'll go to daniel, go ahead, arthur. you absolutely will want to. one of the things i want to address really quickly was this idea of the left, which again is being the majority of our being very focused on justice. they are, but it's a, it's a, i've been sort of neo neo marxist sort of justice in that for example, in new york city, the laws that came out over the last couple of years have sent violent crime, skyrocketing and they're not addressing it or death guessing the way they should be in california, you can steal up to the camera, what the number was,

the thousands of dollars worth of goods from stores and it's, it's almost on prosecutable. people like there's video people watching other people walk in, walk out with arm loads of stuff and they can't do anything about it. there's, there's a sort of strange justice that is moving away from all of law. like actually just watching the law across the board. ready equally to everyone and moving to sort of we pick and choose who we like and we don't like, we don't like you, no matter what you do, you're gonna be in trouble. and that's definitely possible with, with any legal system. and we like you to do whatever you want. got to like, like call and, and putting people in the old a shot forms. this is, this is the issue at hand. i think because there is a double standard and then we can reduce costs for what was room, while the other safeguards, let's remove the electoral college. that's where it's all of us are and we've all these things and the people on the other side, hold on, hold on, hold on. you're already, you have a war point of view. you already have a lot of power. and now you want the last 8 guards keeping you from overrunning

daniel, react to that because i think that's a good summation of how a lot of conservative feel. go right ahead because they aren't safeguards. i mean that the funny thing is that the founders were great believers in the moderate sector and, but they created a system which is resulting and growing polarization. and so why is that? and the reason is, is that when you don't give any, don't allow democracy, society for force a part that faction lies, is that balkanized his head off in different direction because there's no real way of effectively resolving disputes. and yes, of course, you know, democratic argument can be ferocious. i mean, 13 people want abortion and 12 don't want to butcher than yeah, i mean that those 12 people will be extremely upset. but they also know in a democracy that all they have to do is get to get one of those 13 to switch sides

sides and they all be then the majority and the position to do want to others. others have done and to them. so i, so, i mean, that's the way democracy works. and curiously enough, the most democratic countries are usually the stable with. and the most moderate and the, the countries that are left democratic are the ones that are more polarized. and that's what we're seeing in the u. s a tendency towards breakdown and polarization, and freeform anger that has no rational out. okay, with arthur and i would i completely agree with the polarization argument that daniel's making. but arthur, a, it seems to me, and it's patently obvious to me, is that the media enjoys doing this and putting people at each other's throats. i mean, it's ok to really hate and hate hard on all these platforms here. and i don't even participated, and obviously it's such a waste of time. why should i get my blood up about it?

because if someone is so disrespectful to you, why should you have any respect in answering your you can have an argument with people like that. and i think that's a lot of people who feel, and i think daniel, for genuine, for very different reasons would say, you know, people are very, very tired of this. that be, they kind of discourse that we have because you can't win. ok, it's a 0 sum. that's not the way it's supposed to be in a democracy. go ahead arthur. so this brings me to one of the things that i think would make a big impact in reuniting people. and it's something that the journalist author, diana west calls neutral fact. and it's something that, at least we believe used to happen, definitely doesn't happen any more. but where there at least is some body of neutral fact to which people can refer. we have this, we have a society that was built on the idea of evidence and rationale and enlightenment thought. and we've moved into

a sort of post modern place where there's so much subjectivity and of course, the media for whatever reasons for all the reasons that they have really, really exacerbate this. but if we could have that body of knowledge studies, just act and needs to be proved and needs to have evidence to back it up. i think that would go a long ways to changing this. and one of the key points on this would be something like, what's called the insurrection on january 6th. you have a media that for an entire year was completely white washing riots. autonomous zones. portland was burning. i don't even know if it's still is, but it's been going on for a long time. there is all this sort of may him and violence going on and it was arthur, i had to jump. sorry, i have to jump in here. we've run out of time, what have you both back because we didn't really get into january 6 and i want to

have a long conversation about that. many thanks and i guess in new york and in toronto, and thanks to our viewers for watching us here are to see you next time. remember, cross top roles the ah, the families that mark sounds good. i just mark your function. you go with a good way to show me what to do done. got i've got that limit and i wanted them off. you're gonna

be back to no one above the less about me join me every thursday on the alec simon show and i'll be speaking to guess in the world, the politics sport. business. i'm show business. i'll see you then me i can't rec, drugs are essential for millions of patients or are they, they want that pill that they hope will take care of their problem thoroughly and rapidly in the short term. they really work. the problem is, in the long term, they're mostly disastrous. suddenly stopping

a drug can cause withdrawal symptoms more serious than the condition it was meant to treat instead of the beneficial effects of these different medicines, any up to something wonderful. very often they're harmful effects and up to something terrible can pills so of all ills are trying to mitigate life itself. i just think i was like i was just scared, scared, little girl of 24. and like me didn't have to be so complicated. ah, celebratory gun fire rings out across cobble as america 20. your presence and i've gamma stand comes to an end. the pentagon confirmed the last us evacuation flight left the country in the early hours of the 31st deadline day. the

dana san.