March 31, 2025 • 29 mins
The Left is in panic mode after Trump signed an executive order requiring proof of citizenship to vote. They claim Trump’s trying to disenfranchise millions of Americans. If only. Voting is a privilege, not a right, and I’ll explain why we need radical, sweeping new restrictions on that privilege. Also, the far-left has once again transcended satire. This time, the British socialist Prime Minister Keir Starmer is banning so-called ninja swords. It sounds like a Babylon Bee article but it’s not. We’ll talk about all of it today on The Conservative Rebel.
If You Enjoyed This Episode, Please Share It Leave a Review
Follow on X for More Great Commentary: https://x.com/CnsrvtvRbl
Subscribe on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@theconservativerebel
Follow on Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/ConservativeRebel76
Email Your Comments, Concerns, Insults, and Death Threats to ConservativeRebel76@gmail.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_00 (00:00):
Today on The Conservative Rebel, the left is
in panic mode after Trump signedan executive order requiring
proof of citizenship to vote.
They're claiming, to no one'ssurprise, that requiring voters
to prove who they are beforethey're allowed to choose the
leader of the free world is anattack on voting rights and the
same thing as a Jim Crow polltax.
(00:22):
Trump's trying to disenfranchisemillions of Americans, they
claim.
If only.
Voting is a privilege, not aright, and I'll explain why we
need radical, sweeping newrestrictions on that privilege.
Also, the far left has onceagain transcended satire.
This time, the British SocialistPrime Minister Keir Starmer is
(00:44):
banning so-called ninja swords.
It sounds like a Babylon Beearticle, but it's not.
We'll talk about all of it todayon The Conservative Rebel.
UNKNOWN (00:55):
The Conservative Rebel
SPEAKER_00 (01:04):
Ever since the disastrous, corrupt 2020
election, Donald Trump hasrallied the conservative
movement in favor of protectingthe vote and securing our
elections.
On the campaign trail, electionintegrity was one of the major
issues he would often talkabout, and he promised voters
that if he was elected, he woulddo something about it.
(01:26):
Well, this week, that's exactlywhat Trump did.
Fox has this, quote, PresidentDonald Trump on Tuesday signed
an executive The executive orderrequiring people to provide
proof of American citizenshipwhen they register to vote, and
demanding that all ballots bereviewed by election day.
The order requiresgovernment-issued proof of U.S.
(01:47):
citizenship on its voterregistration forms, directs the
Attorney General to enter intoinformation-sharing agreements
with state election officials toidentify cases of election fraud
or other election lawviolations, and conditions
federal election-related fundson states complying with federal
election integrity measures.
(02:08):
There are other steps that wewill be taking in the coming
weeks, Trump said just beforesigning the order.
We think we'll be able to end upgetting fair elections.
Election experts immediatelycriticized the move, saying it
would disenfranchise millions ofvoters.
Quote, This executive orderwould block tens of millions of
(02:29):
American citizens from voting,the Brennan Center for Justice
at New York University wrote Sothe left, of course, is having a
very predictable meltdown.
Colorado's left-wing Secretaryof State, for example, said
(02:52):
requiring voter ID would, quote,Any new requirement to show
proof of citizenship will be ahurdle to many people, and
especially blue-collar people,people of color, and frankly
potentially women, women whohave gotten married and haven't
(03:13):
updated their differentidentification forms, which
would be required under thisexecutive order.
In general, this executive orderis aimed at making it harder for
many citizens to vote.
It's a broad attempt todisenfranchise Americans.
Wow.
God forbid.
God forbid you should berequired to prove who you are
(03:37):
before you get to choose theleader of the free world.
What a radical idea.
This is what this woman andother Democrat politicians who
claim the most basic imaginablesteps to protect the integrity
of American elections aresomehow tyrannical and racist
pretend to think.
(03:57):
They pretend that requiringpeople to prove their identity
before they get to decide whowill run the country is akin to
poll taxes and Jim Crow.
Because it's not like you haveto show an ID to, I don't know,
get a driver's license so youcan legally drive a car, or fly
(04:18):
anywhere from any airportanywhere, or buy a firearm, or
even just buy alcoholicbeverages in some cases.
It's not like 46 out of 47countries in Europe require
voters to show ID.
Except it is.
It is like that.
All of those things are true.
(04:39):
But for the left, requiring youto prove your identity before
you vote is just too much.
It's too much to expect votersto prove who they are, even when
they have to prove it in so manyother situations in life, and
when pretty much all of Westerncivilization except the US has
(05:00):
that as a basic requirement.
So this order is certainly astep in the right direction.
The only problem with it is thatit doesn't go far enough.
The problem with it is not thatit restricts the right to vote,
but that it doesn't restrict theright to vote enough.
And almost everyone on both theleft and the right does not
(05:25):
really see this.
They don't really see theproblem that we let every single
adult in the country who wantsto be able to have a say in who
the leader of the free world isgoing to be.
Almost everyone reveres theprivilege of voting as some
sacred, inalienable, even holyright.
(05:48):
And anyone who dares to questionthe idea that absolutely
everyone who happens to be abovethe age of 18 deserves a say in
who will lead the country is afar-right extremist, a heretic,
a traitor to the principles ofour so-called democracy.
Voting, we're required tobelieve, is a fundamental human
(06:12):
right.
It is a sacred ritual ofAmerica's modern secular liberal
statist religion.
You drive through town onelection day, you'll see banners
and signs urging people to vote,oftentimes not for a specific
candidate or a specific cause,but just to vote for anyone and
(06:33):
for anything.
People proudly wearing pins orstickers that say, I voted, and
urging any random person theycome into contact with to vote.
Vote Republican, Democrat,Libertarian, Socialist,
Communist, these people don'tcare.
The important thing is that youvote, because voting is good for
(06:54):
its own sake.
And most people will just acceptthis idea that voting is some
inalienable right absolutelyeveryone has and won't ever
question it.
But if you bother to think aboutit for five seconds, you quickly
realize the idea is insane.
(07:14):
It's just delusional.
First of all, voting is supposedto be a means to an end.
It is not the end itself.
The reason that there is anyvoting at all in America is
because the framers of ourConstitution believed that a
government that was accountableto the people would be less
(07:37):
prone to corruption and lessprone to get bigger and more
powerful.
They didn't set up a Republican,popularly elected form of
government where our politiciansare elected by the people for
its own sake.
That's a very important thing tounderstand.
(07:57):
They set it up because theybelieved that a government that
was popularly elected would staysmaller.
The Founders didn't think aRepublican government was
inherently superior onphilosophical grounds to a
monarchy ruled by a king or anaristocracy ruled by noblemen.
(08:18):
A government is a government,whether you're dealing with one
ruler or hundreds of rulers.
A government is still, when itcomes down to it, a collection
of fallible human beings with amonopoly on the use of force.
It is a collection of fallible,imperfect people with the
(08:39):
ability to demand that yousurrender a tenth or a quarter
or half of your hard-earnedmoney or be ripped from your
family and thrown in a cage.
It doesn't matter how that groupof people got their power.
It doesn't matter if the votersgave it to them.
It doesn't matter if they haveit because they're rich or they
(09:01):
have it because they inheritedit from their fathers in a
monarchy.
What matters is that they dohave that power, and that power
needs to be as limited aspossible.
Sometimes the power ofgovernment will be far more
limited in a monarchy or anaristocracy.
Sometimes it will be far morelimited in a democracy.
(09:23):
Sometimes it will be morelimited if lots of people can
vote.
Sometimes it will be morelimited if only a few people can
vote.
Again, voting is not an abstractright everyone has.
It's a means to an end.
The purpose of holding electionsis to keep government small and
(09:43):
limited and accountable.
So what happens when yourgovernment is not kept small and
limited and accountable?
What happens when yourgovernment becomes the biggest,
most powerful government in thehistory of the world?
What happens when it creates awelfare state that seizes and
(10:04):
redistributes money?
What happens when it establishesan international empire that's
constantly locked in endlesswars in Europe and the Middle
East that have nothing to doWhat happens when it spends the
money it takes from you withtaxes tearing babies limb from
(10:24):
limb through abortion?
That is to say, what happenswhen you live in the modern
United States of America?
Then, obviously...
Something is not working.
It is time to seriouslyre-evaluate the way our
elections are conducted, becausethey're not doing the thing
(10:46):
they're meant to do.
What's the thing they're meantto do?
Keep government small andaccountable.
Obviously, it's time for arevolution in the way our
elections are conducted.
We need major reform here.
The problem that we have isquite obvious.
(11:06):
In America, we let ignorantmorons who know nothing about
anything, who have no clue whatthe Constitution means, no
understanding of our country'shistory or cultures or values,
we let them vote.
We let immature 18-year-olds whoare too irresponsible to be
trusted to drink beer decide whothe leader of the free world is
(11:30):
going to be.
We have an absolutely insane,delusional voting system.
And because these morons we letvote can be easily brainwashed
by their school teachers, bycollege professors, and all
other kinds of far-left nuts,they reliably vote for Marxist
(11:51):
candidates and Marxist policies.
That's what they've beenprogrammed to do.
Tens of millions of these peopleare voting every year, and our
country is suffering because ofit.
In fact, our country suffersimmeasurably more because we let
(12:11):
stupid people vote illegallythan it has because there are
illegal voters and voter fraudgoing on.
The problem, the main problemthat we have nowadays, even
though illegal issues withelections are a problem, they're
a very serious problem, legalvoting is a problem when you let
(12:34):
anyone who wants to do it.
So the problem that we have hereis very obvious, but so is the
solution.
All we have to do to fix it isjust implement a few basic
restrictions on who can vote.
All we have to do is, as VivekRamaswamy talked about when he
(12:58):
was running for president andnow running for governor of
Ohio, is just require acitizenship test to vote.
That's a great place to start.
And we could raise the votingage to 25.
And just let people who areserving actively in the
(13:18):
military, where they couldpotentially be fighting, you can
let them vote earlier.
But just raise it to everyoneelse for 25, because that's
actually when your brain isactually fully developed.
Before that, your brain is stilldeveloping.
You're mentally still kind of akid until you're 25 years old.
(13:39):
So we could just raise it to 25.
You're not going to hear manypeople my age make that
suggestion, but I'm making itnow.
Because the fact of the matteris, most people who are years
older than me still cannot vote.
They are unfit to vote.
Most college kids, everyoneknows this, most college kids
(14:04):
are unfit to vote.
We could make it a requirementwhere you need to speak English
to vote.
That would be a great one,because we currently have
millions of people living in theUnited States who have no
interest at all in assimilatinginto our culture.
(14:27):
No interest in learning English.
And that's the language of thecountry that very respectfully
and very mercifully andgenerously let them come here
out of charity and generosity.
And they...
respond to that by having nodesire to assimilate into our
(14:48):
culture whatsoever so requiringthem to assimilate and to learn
english there's another thingyou could do that would help
make our elections operate in amore sane manner so there are
lots of things there are commonsense reforms like this that we
can implement that would do somuch good But they're hardly
(15:13):
ever considered by anyonebecause we've all been
indoctrinated to worshipunlimited democracy and think
that anyone who dares tocriticize this radical idea that
everyone who's over 18 deservesto vote.
We've been programmed for ouralarm bells to automatically go
(15:35):
off whenever someone suggeststhat.
And people will even say it'sun-American and
unconstitutional.
But that's so stupid because ourfounders hated and feared
democracy.
They hated and feared the ideathat everyone should be allowed
to vote, which is why only 6% ofthe adult population was
(16:00):
eligible to vote in the firstpresidential election.
So you can't say that universalvoting rights is somehow an
American principle that thefounders supported and you can
never question it.
They only let 6% of adults vote,okay?
Obviously, universal voting isnot some deeply held
(16:25):
constitutional principle orAmerican value.
I'll tell you what is a deeplyheld American value.
Individual liberty.
Free markets, limitedgovernment, personal
responsibility.
And this is getting in the wayof that.
This principle, this fakeprinciple, this ideologically
(16:47):
stupid idea that we should leteveryone vote.
You cannot have liberty and havea country that has that as its
system at the same time.
You cannot let, for example,criminals and mental cases and
just dumb people who can't passa fifth grade citizenship test
(17:10):
vote.
You can't let them decide thefate of your country and still
have a country left and stillhave liberty left.
So for the sake of this country,we need to wake up, we need to
get out of this mentality, andwe need to start implementing
some common sense restrictionson voting.
(17:32):
And that's the direction thatwe're slowly moving in.
Already, since Trump has takenoffice, things that
conservatives would have thoughttoo radical before are gaining
acceptance, like Trumpabolishing USAID, Trump talking
about abolishing the income tax.
Things that you would neverthink in a million years would
(17:53):
happen are happening.
So...
I think that eventually theAmerican right and even some
people in independence, they'regoing to realize this.
They are going to realize thatour voting system needs major
reform if we want our country tosurvive.
(18:13):
Alright, on that happy note,let's check on our neighbors
across the pond, as they wouldsay, in the third world hellhole
known to previous generations asGreat Britain.
Now, the British left is farmore advanced and far more
radical than the American left.
They're kind of the Democrats,except 20 years ahead of the
(18:35):
Democrats.
Historically, a lot of crazyradical things that Britain has
implemented have made their wayto the United States in a matter
of years or a couple decades.
So, by looking at how the leftis behaving in Great Britain, we
can kind of get a feel for howthe might start behaving in
(18:56):
America in the future.
So, for this reason, I'mbringing up a ninja sword ban
that is apparently happening inGreat Britain.
On Thursday, socialist dictatorKeir Starmer put out the
following statement on X, quote,Confirmed.
Ninja swords will be banned bythis summer.
(19:18):
When we promise action, we takeit.
Now, Keir Starmer was not jokingwhen he said that.
Britain is actually passing alaw that bans ninja swords.
That is the term that is beingused.
Ninja swords, believe it or not.
The Independent reports, quote,So Great Britain has a very
(20:11):
serious, very pressing ninjasword problem, and they're
finally cracking down on it.
The evil ninjas, they are nolonger going to be allowed to
run through the streets andterrorize people.
The ninja reign of terror isover.
Why are there so many evilninjas on the loose in Great
Britain?
(20:31):
How did this ninja epidemicstart?
And what's the differencebetween a ninja sword and a
normal...
Regular guy sword, I don't knowwhat you'd call it.
The closest to an answer I couldfind came from the website
gov.uk, which is the officialpage of the British government,
which said this, quote, So ifyou have a knife that's 13
(21:01):
inches long or 25 inches long orwhatever, you're probably not an
evil ninja, so you're good.
But if you have a knife thatmeets those parameters, then you
could, you could be an evilninja.
So then you need to hand overyour knife.
And this law, I'm warning younow, is not going to be well
received in the ninja community.
(21:22):
They're not going to like this.
Before they go out at night todo evil ninja things like stab
random people, they're going tohave to take out their tape
measures and carefully measuretheir murder weapons to make
sure they meet the legalparameters before they go out to
commit murder.
Because, say what you will,about evil ninjas, they do
respect the law.
(21:43):
Not laws against stabbingpeople, but other laws.
So sadly, a lot of evil ninjas,they will be measuring their
blades before they go out ontheir killing sprees and say, Oh
no, my ninja sword is 18 incheslong.
It would be illegal to killpeople with this ninja sword.
And I want to make sure I'mfollowing the law.
Don't want to get in trouble oranything.
(22:06):
And then these poor, dejectedninjas will shuffle out to their
local knife surrender locationand surrender their knives, and
then they'll have to run intoCabela's or Lowe's or whatever
to buy a knife that meets thelegal parameters before they go
on their next stabbing spree.
So now, if you're ever inEngland and an evil ninja drags
you into an alleyway, pins youagainst a wall, and tries to
(22:28):
slit your throat with asuspiciously large knife, just
gently explain to him that whathe's doing is actually,
actually, it's illegal.
Oh, you mean I'm not supposed tobe doing this?
I'm supposed to not murderpeople?
This is illegal?
There's a law against this?
Sorry, I didn't know this wasnot legal.
(22:50):
Thanks for the heads up.
And then he'll leave you aloneand your life will be saved.
So now you know what to do ifyou ever encounter an evil ninja
in England.
This is what the supporters ofthis law think.
This is a glimpse inside thedelusional fantasy world British
and American leftists who wantto control guns and now control
(23:12):
knives live in.
Because make no mistake, thisninja sword ban isn't easy.
any stupider than any guncontrol law we have in America,
it's just as likely that awould-be school shooter would
decide not to commit mass murderbecause he has an illegal gun,
as it's likely that a ninjawon't stab someone to death
(23:33):
because his knife is the wrongsize.
The likelihood of both of thosethings is approximately 0%.
Every law that bans or restrictsthe use of any weapon or
dangerous object gun, knife, orninja sword, makes the insane
assumption that criminals whohave so much disrespect for the
(23:56):
law they're willing to slaughterinnocent people will somehow
care about laws prohibiting themfrom having certain weapons.
That's what the brainiacs whowant gun control think in
America and the brainiacs whowant knife control in Britain
think.
It's the same exact logic.
(24:17):
They think that by outlawinginanimate objects, they can
reduce the number of murdersbecause the murderers won't be
able to use the objects they'veoutlawed to kill people.
By that logic, All Keir Starmer,all American Democrats need to
do to end all murders overnightis just to outlaw every single
(24:40):
gun, knife, axe, fork, spoon,carrot peeler, nunchuck, pair of
scissors, and any other object acriminal could conceivably use
to kill someone.
Just ban them all.
Then the murderers will befrantically looking around for a
legal object to kill someonewith, but they won't be able to
find one, so all violenceviolent crime will instantly end
(25:03):
and Britain and America and anycountry that does this will
become an instant utopia.
By their logic, that's all youhave to do to end violent crime,
because this is the same logicthey're using to justify banning
certain guns and banning certainknives.
It's ridiculous.
And that's certainly insaneenough, but believe it or not,
(25:28):
weapon control actually getseven stupider than that.
Because not only have youstopped precisely zero murders
by passing a law like this, youwill actually increase the
number of murders and increaseviolent crime.
Because there's only one groupof people in the whole world who
(25:50):
cares at all about following gunand knife control regulations.
That group of people are thelaw-abiding citizens of your
country.
The law-abiding citizens becausethey don't want to get in
trouble, will follow your stupidlaws.
They'll take their knives to theknife surrender bin or whatever.
(26:12):
They'll stop buying the weaponsyou outlaw, reluctantly, but
they'll stop buying them.
But the criminals, who as wediscussed, do not care in the
slightest about any law, won'tdo any of that.
So weapon control laws not onlydon't stop criminals, they help
(26:32):
them get away with even morecrimes.
They give criminals a virtualmonopoly on whatever weapon is
being outlawed.
You are giving criminals amonopoly on the outlawed weapons
while you make it infinitelyharder for law-abiding citizens
to defend themselves against thecriminals you've emboldened.
(26:56):
It's like in a war.
Say World War II.
The Allies decide they are notgoing to use tanks, they are not
going to use fighter jets,because both of those things
kill people.
Okay, good luck convincingHitler not to use tanks and
fighter jets.
That's a way to lose a warinstantly.
(27:18):
It's the exact same logic.
It's dumb every place you try toapply it.
It is so dumb.
Now, of course, I don't thinkall the gun and knife control
leftists are this off the chartsignorant.
A lot of them understand all ofthis full well.
They don't actually think anymurderer is going to care about
(27:41):
Keir Starmer's stupid ninjasword law.
But here's what they dounderstand.
The more weapons you confiscatefrom law-abiding citizens, the
less they can resist you andyour power and your power.
That is what gun control, knifecontrol, and any weapon control
(28:02):
law is about.
It is about taking away theability of law-abiding citizens
to defend themselves against thegovernment.
It is about making resistance totyranny harder and close to
impossible.
So what could Keir Starmer do ifhe actually wanted to reduce
(28:23):
crime?
I don't know.
Maybe stop letting in all theMuslim jihadis and all the
people from North Africa andIran into your country by the
millions.
Ever thought of that, Kir?
Maybe stop importing all ofthese third world people to
invade and take over yourcountry.
(28:43):
How about that?
How about you try that?
So I would not be surprised ifin a couple of years American
leftists start pushing for knifecontrol.
What would surprise me is ifAmericans don't resist it.
Because I think that unlike inGreat Britain, America with its
(29:05):
stronger Second Amendmenttradition, its stronger
tradition of individualism andindividual rights and the right
of self-defense is not going totake it.
Americans will not put up withthis insanity.
We are different than theBritish.
But all the same, now more thanever, it is very important to
(29:29):
educate voters on the importanceof the Second Amendment and the
importance of the right ofself-defense.
And this story is a greatopportunity to realize just how
ridiculous the logic behindweapon control truly is.
Thanks for listening to thisepisode of The Conservative
Rebel.
(29:49):
Please subscribe to our podcast,leave a like, and share.
I'll see you on the nextepisode.
Today on The Conservative Rebel, the left is
in panic mode after Trump signedan executive order requiring
proof of citizenship to vote.
They're claiming, to no one'ssurprise, that requiring voters
to prove who they are beforethey're allowed to choose the
leader of the free world is anattack on voting rights and the
same thing as a Jim Crow polltax.
(00:22):
Trump's trying to disenfranchisemillions of Americans, they
claim.
If only.
Voting is a privilege, not aright, and I'll explain why we
need radical, sweeping newrestrictions on that privilege.
Also, the far left has onceagain transcended satire.
This time, the British SocialistPrime Minister Keir Starmer is
(00:44):
banning so-called ninja swords.
It sounds like a Babylon Beearticle, but it's not.
We'll talk about all of it todayon The Conservative Rebel.
UNKNOWN (00:55):
The Conservative Rebel
SPEAKER_00 (01:04):
Ever since the disastrous, corrupt 2020
election, Donald Trump hasrallied the conservative
movement in favor of protectingthe vote and securing our
elections.
On the campaign trail, electionintegrity was one of the major
issues he would often talkabout, and he promised voters
that if he was elected, he woulddo something about it.
(01:26):
Well, this week, that's exactlywhat Trump did.
Fox has this, quote, PresidentDonald Trump on Tuesday signed
an executive The executive orderrequiring people to provide
proof of American citizenshipwhen they register to vote, and
demanding that all ballots bereviewed by election day.
The order requiresgovernment-issued proof of U.S.
(01:47):
citizenship on its voterregistration forms, directs the
Attorney General to enter intoinformation-sharing agreements
with state election officials toidentify cases of election fraud
or other election lawviolations, and conditions
federal election-related fundson states complying with federal
election integrity measures.
(02:08):
There are other steps that wewill be taking in the coming
weeks, Trump said just beforesigning the order.
We think we'll be able to end upgetting fair elections.
Election experts immediatelycriticized the move, saying it
would disenfranchise millions ofvoters.
Quote, This executive orderwould block tens of millions of
(02:29):
American citizens from voting,the Brennan Center for Justice
at New York University wrote Sothe left, of course, is having a
very predictable meltdown.
Colorado's left-wing Secretaryof State, for example, said
(02:52):
requiring voter ID would, quote,Any new requirement to show
proof of citizenship will be ahurdle to many people, and
especially blue-collar people,people of color, and frankly
potentially women, women whohave gotten married and haven't
(03:13):
updated their differentidentification forms, which
would be required under thisexecutive order.
In general, this executive orderis aimed at making it harder for
many citizens to vote.
It's a broad attempt todisenfranchise Americans.
Wow.
God forbid.
God forbid you should berequired to prove who you are
(03:37):
before you get to choose theleader of the free world.
What a radical idea.
This is what this woman andother Democrat politicians who
claim the most basic imaginablesteps to protect the integrity
of American elections aresomehow tyrannical and racist
pretend to think.
(03:57):
They pretend that requiringpeople to prove their identity
before they get to decide whowill run the country is akin to
poll taxes and Jim Crow.
Because it's not like you haveto show an ID to, I don't know,
get a driver's license so youcan legally drive a car, or fly
(04:18):
anywhere from any airportanywhere, or buy a firearm, or
even just buy alcoholicbeverages in some cases.
It's not like 46 out of 47countries in Europe require
voters to show ID.
Except it is.
It is like that.
All of those things are true.
(04:39):
But for the left, requiring youto prove your identity before
you vote is just too much.
It's too much to expect votersto prove who they are, even when
they have to prove it in so manyother situations in life, and
when pretty much all of Westerncivilization except the US has
(05:00):
that as a basic requirement.
So this order is certainly astep in the right direction.
The only problem with it is thatit doesn't go far enough.
The problem with it is not thatit restricts the right to vote,
but that it doesn't restrict theright to vote enough.
And almost everyone on both theleft and the right does not
(05:25):
really see this.
They don't really see theproblem that we let every single
adult in the country who wantsto be able to have a say in who
the leader of the free world isgoing to be.
Almost everyone reveres theprivilege of voting as some
sacred, inalienable, even holyright.
(05:48):
And anyone who dares to questionthe idea that absolutely
everyone who happens to be abovethe age of 18 deserves a say in
who will lead the country is afar-right extremist, a heretic,
a traitor to the principles ofour so-called democracy.
Voting, we're required tobelieve, is a fundamental human
(06:12):
right.
It is a sacred ritual ofAmerica's modern secular liberal
statist religion.
You drive through town onelection day, you'll see banners
and signs urging people to vote,oftentimes not for a specific
candidate or a specific cause,but just to vote for anyone and
(06:33):
for anything.
People proudly wearing pins orstickers that say, I voted, and
urging any random person theycome into contact with to vote.
Vote Republican, Democrat,Libertarian, Socialist,
Communist, these people don'tcare.
The important thing is that youvote, because voting is good for
(06:54):
its own sake.
And most people will just acceptthis idea that voting is some
inalienable right absolutelyeveryone has and won't ever
question it.
But if you bother to think aboutit for five seconds, you quickly
realize the idea is insane.
(07:14):
It's just delusional.
First of all, voting is supposedto be a means to an end.
It is not the end itself.
The reason that there is anyvoting at all in America is
because the framers of ourConstitution believed that a
government that was accountableto the people would be less
(07:37):
prone to corruption and lessprone to get bigger and more
powerful.
They didn't set up a Republican,popularly elected form of
government where our politiciansare elected by the people for
its own sake.
That's a very important thing tounderstand.
(07:57):
They set it up because theybelieved that a government that
was popularly elected would staysmaller.
The Founders didn't think aRepublican government was
inherently superior onphilosophical grounds to a
monarchy ruled by a king or anaristocracy ruled by noblemen.
(08:18):
A government is a government,whether you're dealing with one
ruler or hundreds of rulers.
A government is still, when itcomes down to it, a collection
of fallible human beings with amonopoly on the use of force.
It is a collection of fallible,imperfect people with the
(08:39):
ability to demand that yousurrender a tenth or a quarter
or half of your hard-earnedmoney or be ripped from your
family and thrown in a cage.
It doesn't matter how that groupof people got their power.
It doesn't matter if the votersgave it to them.
It doesn't matter if they haveit because they're rich or they
(09:01):
have it because they inheritedit from their fathers in a
monarchy.
What matters is that they dohave that power, and that power
needs to be as limited aspossible.
Sometimes the power ofgovernment will be far more
limited in a monarchy or anaristocracy.
Sometimes it will be far morelimited in a democracy.
(09:23):
Sometimes it will be morelimited if lots of people can
vote.
Sometimes it will be morelimited if only a few people can
vote.
Again, voting is not an abstractright everyone has.
It's a means to an end.
The purpose of holding electionsis to keep government small and
(09:43):
limited and accountable.
So what happens when yourgovernment is not kept small and
limited and accountable?
What happens when yourgovernment becomes the biggest,
most powerful government in thehistory of the world?
What happens when it creates awelfare state that seizes and
(10:04):
redistributes money?
What happens when it establishesan international empire that's
constantly locked in endlesswars in Europe and the Middle
East that have nothing to doWhat happens when it spends the
money it takes from you withtaxes tearing babies limb from
(10:24):
limb through abortion?
That is to say, what happenswhen you live in the modern
United States of America?
Then, obviously...
Something is not working.
It is time to seriouslyre-evaluate the way our
elections are conducted, becausethey're not doing the thing
(10:46):
they're meant to do.
What's the thing they're meantto do?
Keep government small andaccountable.
Obviously, it's time for arevolution in the way our
elections are conducted.
We need major reform here.
The problem that we have isquite obvious.
(11:06):
In America, we let ignorantmorons who know nothing about
anything, who have no clue whatthe Constitution means, no
understanding of our country'shistory or cultures or values,
we let them vote.
We let immature 18-year-olds whoare too irresponsible to be
trusted to drink beer decide whothe leader of the free world is
(11:30):
going to be.
We have an absolutely insane,delusional voting system.
And because these morons we letvote can be easily brainwashed
by their school teachers, bycollege professors, and all
other kinds of far-left nuts,they reliably vote for Marxist
(11:51):
candidates and Marxist policies.
That's what they've beenprogrammed to do.
Tens of millions of these peopleare voting every year, and our
country is suffering because ofit.
In fact, our country suffersimmeasurably more because we let
(12:11):
stupid people vote illegallythan it has because there are
illegal voters and voter fraudgoing on.
The problem, the main problemthat we have nowadays, even
though illegal issues withelections are a problem, they're
a very serious problem, legalvoting is a problem when you let
(12:34):
anyone who wants to do it.
So the problem that we have hereis very obvious, but so is the
solution.
All we have to do to fix it isjust implement a few basic
restrictions on who can vote.
All we have to do is, as VivekRamaswamy talked about when he
(12:58):
was running for president andnow running for governor of
Ohio, is just require acitizenship test to vote.
That's a great place to start.
And we could raise the votingage to 25.
And just let people who areserving actively in the
(13:18):
military, where they couldpotentially be fighting, you can
let them vote earlier.
But just raise it to everyoneelse for 25, because that's
actually when your brain isactually fully developed.
Before that, your brain is stilldeveloping.
You're mentally still kind of akid until you're 25 years old.
(13:39):
So we could just raise it to 25.
You're not going to hear manypeople my age make that
suggestion, but I'm making itnow.
Because the fact of the matteris, most people who are years
older than me still cannot vote.
They are unfit to vote.
Most college kids, everyoneknows this, most college kids
(14:04):
are unfit to vote.
We could make it a requirementwhere you need to speak English
to vote.
That would be a great one,because we currently have
millions of people living in theUnited States who have no
interest at all in assimilatinginto our culture.
(14:27):
No interest in learning English.
And that's the language of thecountry that very respectfully
and very mercifully andgenerously let them come here
out of charity and generosity.
And they...
respond to that by having nodesire to assimilate into our
(14:48):
culture whatsoever so requiringthem to assimilate and to learn
english there's another thingyou could do that would help
make our elections operate in amore sane manner so there are
lots of things there are commonsense reforms like this that we
can implement that would do somuch good But they're hardly
(15:13):
ever considered by anyonebecause we've all been
indoctrinated to worshipunlimited democracy and think
that anyone who dares tocriticize this radical idea that
everyone who's over 18 deservesto vote.
We've been programmed for ouralarm bells to automatically go
(15:35):
off whenever someone suggeststhat.
And people will even say it'sun-American and
unconstitutional.
But that's so stupid because ourfounders hated and feared
democracy.
They hated and feared the ideathat everyone should be allowed
to vote, which is why only 6% ofthe adult population was
(16:00):
eligible to vote in the firstpresidential election.
So you can't say that universalvoting rights is somehow an
American principle that thefounders supported and you can
never question it.
They only let 6% of adults vote,okay?
Obviously, universal voting isnot some deeply held
(16:25):
constitutional principle orAmerican value.
I'll tell you what is a deeplyheld American value.
Individual liberty.
Free markets, limitedgovernment, personal
responsibility.
And this is getting in the wayof that.
This principle, this fakeprinciple, this ideologically
(16:47):
stupid idea that we should leteveryone vote.
You cannot have liberty and havea country that has that as its
system at the same time.
You cannot let, for example,criminals and mental cases and
just dumb people who can't passa fifth grade citizenship test
(17:10):
vote.
You can't let them decide thefate of your country and still
have a country left and stillhave liberty left.
So for the sake of this country,we need to wake up, we need to
get out of this mentality, andwe need to start implementing
some common sense restrictionson voting.
(17:32):
And that's the direction thatwe're slowly moving in.
Already, since Trump has takenoffice, things that
conservatives would have thoughttoo radical before are gaining
acceptance, like Trumpabolishing USAID, Trump talking
about abolishing the income tax.
Things that you would neverthink in a million years would
(17:53):
happen are happening.
So...
I think that eventually theAmerican right and even some
people in independence, they'regoing to realize this.
They are going to realize thatour voting system needs major
reform if we want our country tosurvive.
(18:13):
Alright, on that happy note,let's check on our neighbors
across the pond, as they wouldsay, in the third world hellhole
known to previous generations asGreat Britain.
Now, the British left is farmore advanced and far more
radical than the American left.
They're kind of the Democrats,except 20 years ahead of the
(18:35):
Democrats.
Historically, a lot of crazyradical things that Britain has
implemented have made their wayto the United States in a matter
of years or a couple decades.
So, by looking at how the leftis behaving in Great Britain, we
can kind of get a feel for howthe might start behaving in
(18:56):
America in the future.
So, for this reason, I'mbringing up a ninja sword ban
that is apparently happening inGreat Britain.
On Thursday, socialist dictatorKeir Starmer put out the
following statement on X, quote,Confirmed.
Ninja swords will be banned bythis summer.
(19:18):
When we promise action, we takeit.
Now, Keir Starmer was not jokingwhen he said that.
Britain is actually passing alaw that bans ninja swords.
That is the term that is beingused.
Ninja swords, believe it or not.
The Independent reports, quote,So Great Britain has a very
(20:11):
serious, very pressing ninjasword problem, and they're
finally cracking down on it.
The evil ninjas, they are nolonger going to be allowed to
run through the streets andterrorize people.
The ninja reign of terror isover.
Why are there so many evilninjas on the loose in Great
Britain?
(20:31):
How did this ninja epidemicstart?
And what's the differencebetween a ninja sword and a
normal...
Regular guy sword, I don't knowwhat you'd call it.
The closest to an answer I couldfind came from the website
gov.uk, which is the officialpage of the British government,
which said this, quote, So ifyou have a knife that's 13
(21:01):
inches long or 25 inches long orwhatever, you're probably not an
evil ninja, so you're good.
But if you have a knife thatmeets those parameters, then you
could, you could be an evilninja.
So then you need to hand overyour knife.
And this law, I'm warning younow, is not going to be well
received in the ninja community.
(21:22):
They're not going to like this.
Before they go out at night todo evil ninja things like stab
random people, they're going tohave to take out their tape
measures and carefully measuretheir murder weapons to make
sure they meet the legalparameters before they go out to
commit murder.
Because, say what you will,about evil ninjas, they do
respect the law.
(21:43):
Not laws against stabbingpeople, but other laws.
So sadly, a lot of evil ninjas,they will be measuring their
blades before they go out ontheir killing sprees and say, Oh
no, my ninja sword is 18 incheslong.
It would be illegal to killpeople with this ninja sword.
And I want to make sure I'mfollowing the law.
Don't want to get in trouble oranything.
(22:06):
And then these poor, dejectedninjas will shuffle out to their
local knife surrender locationand surrender their knives, and
then they'll have to run intoCabela's or Lowe's or whatever
to buy a knife that meets thelegal parameters before they go
on their next stabbing spree.
So now, if you're ever inEngland and an evil ninja drags
you into an alleyway, pins youagainst a wall, and tries to
(22:28):
slit your throat with asuspiciously large knife, just
gently explain to him that whathe's doing is actually,
actually, it's illegal.
Oh, you mean I'm not supposed tobe doing this?
I'm supposed to not murderpeople?
This is illegal?
There's a law against this?
Sorry, I didn't know this wasnot legal.
(22:50):
Thanks for the heads up.
And then he'll leave you aloneand your life will be saved.
So now you know what to do ifyou ever encounter an evil ninja
in England.
This is what the supporters ofthis law think.
This is a glimpse inside thedelusional fantasy world British
and American leftists who wantto control guns and now control
(23:12):
knives live in.
Because make no mistake, thisninja sword ban isn't easy.
any stupider than any guncontrol law we have in America,
it's just as likely that awould-be school shooter would
decide not to commit mass murderbecause he has an illegal gun,
as it's likely that a ninjawon't stab someone to death
(23:33):
because his knife is the wrongsize.
The likelihood of both of thosethings is approximately 0%.
Every law that bans or restrictsthe use of any weapon or
dangerous object gun, knife, orninja sword, makes the insane
assumption that criminals whohave so much disrespect for the
(23:56):
law they're willing to slaughterinnocent people will somehow
care about laws prohibiting themfrom having certain weapons.
That's what the brainiacs whowant gun control think in
America and the brainiacs whowant knife control in Britain
think.
It's the same exact logic.
(24:17):
They think that by outlawinginanimate objects, they can
reduce the number of murdersbecause the murderers won't be
able to use the objects they'veoutlawed to kill people.
By that logic, All Keir Starmer,all American Democrats need to
do to end all murders overnightis just to outlaw every single
(24:40):
gun, knife, axe, fork, spoon,carrot peeler, nunchuck, pair of
scissors, and any other object acriminal could conceivably use
to kill someone.
Just ban them all.
Then the murderers will befrantically looking around for a
legal object to kill someonewith, but they won't be able to
find one, so all violenceviolent crime will instantly end
(25:03):
and Britain and America and anycountry that does this will
become an instant utopia.
By their logic, that's all youhave to do to end violent crime,
because this is the same logicthey're using to justify banning
certain guns and banning certainknives.
It's ridiculous.
And that's certainly insaneenough, but believe it or not,
(25:28):
weapon control actually getseven stupider than that.
Because not only have youstopped precisely zero murders
by passing a law like this, youwill actually increase the
number of murders and increaseviolent crime.
Because there's only one groupof people in the whole world who
(25:50):
cares at all about following gunand knife control regulations.
That group of people are thelaw-abiding citizens of your
country.
The law-abiding citizens becausethey don't want to get in
trouble, will follow your stupidlaws.
They'll take their knives to theknife surrender bin or whatever.
(26:12):
They'll stop buying the weaponsyou outlaw, reluctantly, but
they'll stop buying them.
But the criminals, who as wediscussed, do not care in the
slightest about any law, won'tdo any of that.
So weapon control laws not onlydon't stop criminals, they help
(26:32):
them get away with even morecrimes.
They give criminals a virtualmonopoly on whatever weapon is
being outlawed.
You are giving criminals amonopoly on the outlawed weapons
while you make it infinitelyharder for law-abiding citizens
to defend themselves against thecriminals you've emboldened.
(26:56):
It's like in a war.
Say World War II.
The Allies decide they are notgoing to use tanks, they are not
going to use fighter jets,because both of those things
kill people.
Okay, good luck convincingHitler not to use tanks and
fighter jets.
That's a way to lose a warinstantly.
(27:18):
It's the exact same logic.
It's dumb every place you try toapply it.
It is so dumb.
Now, of course, I don't thinkall the gun and knife control
leftists are this off the chartsignorant.
A lot of them understand all ofthis full well.
They don't actually think anymurderer is going to care about
(27:41):
Keir Starmer's stupid ninjasword law.
But here's what they dounderstand.
The more weapons you confiscatefrom law-abiding citizens, the
less they can resist you andyour power and your power.
That is what gun control, knifecontrol, and any weapon control
(28:02):
law is about.
It is about taking away theability of law-abiding citizens
to defend themselves against thegovernment.
It is about making resistance totyranny harder and close to
impossible.
So what could Keir Starmer do ifhe actually wanted to reduce
(28:23):
crime?
I don't know.
Maybe stop letting in all theMuslim jihadis and all the
people from North Africa andIran into your country by the
millions.
Ever thought of that, Kir?
Maybe stop importing all ofthese third world people to
invade and take over yourcountry.
(28:43):
How about that?
How about you try that?
So I would not be surprised ifin a couple of years American
leftists start pushing for knifecontrol.
What would surprise me is ifAmericans don't resist it.
Because I think that unlike inGreat Britain, America with its
(29:05):
stronger Second Amendmenttradition, its stronger
tradition of individualism andindividual rights and the right
of self-defense is not going totake it.
Americans will not put up withthis insanity.
We are different than theBritish.
But all the same, now more thanever, it is very important to
(29:29):
educate voters on the importanceof the Second Amendment and the
importance of the right ofself-defense.
And this story is a greatopportunity to realize just how
ridiculous the logic behindweapon control truly is.
Thanks for listening to thisepisode of The Conservative
Rebel.
(29:49):
Please subscribe to our podcast,leave a like, and share.
I'll see you on the nextepisode.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Two Guys, Five Rings: Matt, Bowen & The Olympics
Two Guys (Bowen Yang and Matt Rogers). Five Rings (you know, from the Olympics logo). One essential podcast for the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics. Bowen Yang (SNL, Wicked) and Matt Rogers (Palm Royale, No Good Deed) of Las Culturistas are back for a second season of Two Guys, Five Rings, a collaboration with NBC Sports and iHeartRadio. In this 15-episode event, Bowen and Matt discuss the top storylines, obsess over Italian culture, and find out what really goes on in the Olympic Village.