The Conservative Rebel
The Conservative Rebel dares the next generation of American Patriots to resist the tyranny of cultural Marxism and government overreach – all from the perspective of a right-wing teenager. It delivers bold and unapologetic takes on today's most controversial issues that you won't hear anywhere else – seasoned with just that snark and dry wit you crave. Take a chainsaw to the official narrative and learn what the talking heads won't tell you.
The Conservative Rebel
You Don't Have The Right To Vote
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 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
Today on The Conservative Rebel, the left is in panic mode after Trump signed an executive order requiring proof of citizenship to vote. They're claiming, to no one's surprise, that requiring voters to prove who they are before they're allowed to choose the leader of the free world is an attack on voting rights and the same thing as a Jim Crow poll tax. Trump's trying to disenfranchise millions of Americans, they claim. 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.
UNKNOWN:The Conservative Rebel
SPEAKER_00:Ever since the disastrous, corrupt 2020 election, Donald Trump has rallied the conservative movement in favor of protecting the vote and securing our elections. On the campaign trail, election integrity was one of the major issues he would often talk about, and he promised voters that if he was elected, he would do something about it. Well, this week, that's exactly what Trump did. Fox has this, quote, President Donald Trump on Tuesday signed an executive The executive order requiring people to provide proof of American citizenship when they register to vote, and demanding that all ballots be reviewed by election day. The order requires government-issued proof of U.S. citizenship on its voter registration forms, directs the Attorney General to enter into information-sharing agreements with state election officials to identify cases of election fraud or other election law violations, and conditions federal election-related funds on states complying with federal election integrity measures. There are other steps that we will be taking in the coming weeks, Trump said just before signing the order. We think we'll be able to end up getting fair elections. Election experts immediately criticized the move, saying it would disenfranchise millions of voters. Quote, This executive order would block tens of millions of American citizens from voting, the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University wrote So the left, of course, is having a very predictable meltdown. Colorado's left-wing Secretary of State, for example, said requiring voter ID would, quote, Any new requirement to show proof of citizenship will be a hurdle to many people, and especially blue-collar people, people of color, and frankly potentially women, women who have gotten married and haven't updated their different identification forms, which would be required under this executive order. In general, this executive order is aimed at making it harder for many citizens to vote. It's a broad attempt to disenfranchise Americans. Wow. God forbid. God forbid you should be required to prove who you are before you get to choose the leader of the free world. What a radical idea. This is what this woman and other Democrat politicians who claim the most basic imaginable steps to protect the integrity of American elections are somehow tyrannical and racist pretend to think. They pretend that requiring people to prove their identity before they get to decide who will run the country is akin to poll taxes and Jim Crow. Because it's not like you have to show an ID to, I don't know, get a driver's license so you can legally drive a car, or fly anywhere from any airport anywhere, or buy a firearm, or even just buy alcoholic beverages in some cases. It's not like 46 out of 47 countries in Europe require voters to show ID. Except it is. It is like that. All of those things are true. But for the left, requiring you to prove your identity before you vote is just too much. It's too much to expect voters to prove who they are, even when they have to prove it in so many other situations in life, and when pretty much all of Western civilization except the US has that as a basic requirement. So this order is certainly a step in the right direction. The only problem with it is that it doesn't go far enough. The problem with it is not that it restricts the right to vote, but that it doesn't restrict the right to vote enough. And almost everyone on both the left and the right does not really see this. They don't really see the problem that we let every single adult in the country who wants to be able to have a say in who the leader of the free world is going to be. Almost everyone reveres the privilege of voting as some sacred, inalienable, even holy right. And anyone who dares to question the idea that absolutely everyone who happens to be above the age of 18 deserves a say in who will lead the country is a far-right extremist, a heretic, a traitor to the principles of our so-called democracy. Voting, we're required to believe, is a fundamental human right. It is a sacred ritual of America's modern secular liberal statist religion. You drive through town on election 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 for anything. People proudly wearing pins or stickers that say, I voted, and urging any random person they come into contact with to vote. Vote Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Socialist, Communist, these people don't care. The important thing is that you vote, because voting is good for its own sake. And most people will just accept this idea that voting is some inalienable right absolutely everyone has and won't ever question it. But if you bother to think about it for five seconds, you quickly realize the idea is insane. It's just delusional. First of all, voting is supposed to be a means to an end. It is not the end itself. The reason that there is any voting at all in America is because the framers of our Constitution believed that a government that was accountable to the people would be less prone to corruption and less prone to get bigger and more powerful. They didn't set up a Republican, popularly elected form of government where our politicians are elected by the people for its own sake. That's a very important thing to understand. They set it up because they believed that a government that was popularly elected would stay smaller. The Founders didn't think a Republican government was inherently superior on philosophical grounds to a monarchy ruled by a king or an aristocracy ruled by noblemen. A government is a government, whether you're dealing with one ruler or hundreds of rulers. A government is still, when it comes down to it, a collection of fallible human beings with a monopoly on the use of force. It is a collection of fallible, imperfect people with the ability to demand that you surrender a tenth or a quarter or half of your hard-earned money or be ripped from your family and thrown in a cage. It doesn't matter how that group of people got their power. It doesn't matter if the voters gave it to them. It doesn't matter if they have it because they're rich or they have it because they inherited it from their fathers in a monarchy. What matters is that they do have that power, and that power needs to be as limited as possible. Sometimes the power of government will be far more limited in a monarchy or an aristocracy. Sometimes it will be far more limited in a democracy. Sometimes it will be more limited if lots of people can vote. Sometimes it will be more limited if only a few people can vote. Again, voting is not an abstract right everyone has. It's a means to an end. The purpose of holding elections is to keep government small and limited and accountable. So what happens when your government is not kept small and limited and accountable? What happens when your government becomes the biggest, most powerful government in the history of the world? What happens when it creates a welfare state that seizes and redistributes money? What happens when it establishes an international empire that's constantly locked in endless wars in Europe and the Middle East that have nothing to do What happens when it spends the money it takes from you with taxes tearing babies limb from limb through abortion? That is to say, what happens when you live in the modern United States of America? Then, obviously... Something is not working. It is time to seriously re-evaluate the way our elections are conducted, because they're not doing the thing they're meant to do. What's the thing they're meant to do? Keep government small and accountable. Obviously, it's time for a revolution in the way our elections are conducted. We need major reform here. The problem that we have is quite obvious. In America, we let ignorant morons who know nothing about anything, who have no clue what the Constitution means, no understanding of our country's history or cultures or values, we let them vote. We let immature 18-year-olds who are too irresponsible to be trusted to drink beer decide who the leader of the free world is going to be. We have an absolutely insane, delusional voting system. And because these morons we let vote can be easily brainwashed by their school teachers, by college professors, and all other kinds of far-left nuts, they reliably vote for Marxist candidates and Marxist policies. That's what they've been programmed to do. Tens of millions of these people are voting every year, and our country is suffering because of it. In fact, our country suffers immeasurably more because we let stupid people vote illegally than it has because there are illegal voters and voter fraud going on. The problem, the main problem that we have nowadays, even though illegal issues with elections are a problem, they're a very serious problem, legal voting is a problem when you let anyone who wants to do it. So the problem that we have here is very obvious, but so is the solution. All we have to do to fix it is just implement a few basic restrictions on who can vote. All we have to do is, as Vivek Ramaswamy talked about when he was running for president and now running for governor of Ohio, is just require a citizenship test to vote. That's a great place to start. And we could raise the voting age to 25. And just let people who are serving actively in the military, where they could potentially be fighting, you can let them vote earlier. But just raise it to everyone else for 25, because that's actually when your brain is actually fully developed. Before that, your brain is still developing. You're mentally still kind of a kid until you're 25 years old. So we could just raise it to 25. You're not going to hear many people my age make that suggestion, but I'm making it now. Because the fact of the matter is, most people who are years older than me still cannot vote. They are unfit to vote. Most college kids, everyone knows this, most college kids are unfit to vote. We could make it a requirement where you need to speak English to vote. That would be a great one, because we currently have millions of people living in the United States who have no interest at all in assimilating into our culture. No interest in learning English. And that's the language of the country that very respectfully and very mercifully and generously let them come here out of charity and generosity. And they... respond to that by having no desire to assimilate into our culture whatsoever so requiring them to assimilate and to learn english there's another thing you could do that would help make our elections operate in a more sane manner so there are lots of things there are common sense reforms like this that we can implement that would do so much good But they're hardly ever considered by anyone because we've all been indoctrinated to worship unlimited democracy and think that anyone who dares to criticize this radical idea that everyone who's over 18 deserves to vote. We've been programmed for our alarm bells to automatically go off whenever someone suggests that. And people will even say it's un-American and unconstitutional. But that's so stupid because our founders hated and feared democracy. They hated and feared the idea that everyone should be allowed to vote, which is why only 6% of the adult population was eligible to vote in the first presidential election. So you can't say that universal voting rights is somehow an American principle that the founders supported and you can never question it. They only let 6% of adults vote, okay? Obviously, universal voting is not some deeply held constitutional principle or American value. I'll tell you what is a deeply held American value. Individual liberty. Free markets, limited government, personal responsibility. And this is getting in the way of that. This principle, this fake principle, this ideologically stupid idea that we should let everyone vote. You cannot have liberty and have a 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 pass a fifth grade citizenship test vote. You can't let them decide the fate of your country and still have a country left and still have liberty left. So for the sake of this country, we need to wake up, we need to get out of this mentality, and we need to start implementing some common sense restrictions on voting. And that's the direction that we're slowly moving in. Already, since Trump has taken office, things that conservatives would have thought too radical before are gaining acceptance, like Trump abolishing USAID, Trump talking about abolishing the income tax. Things that you would never think in a million years would happen are happening. So... I think that eventually the American right and even some people in independence, they're going to realize this. They are going to realize that our voting system needs major reform if we want our country to survive. Alright, on that happy note, let's check on our neighbors across the pond, as they would say, in the third world hellhole known to previous generations as Great Britain. Now, the British left is far more advanced and far more radical than the American left. They're kind of the Democrats, except 20 years ahead of the Democrats. Historically, a lot of crazy radical things that Britain has implemented have made their way to the United States in a matter of years or a couple decades. So, by looking at how the left is behaving in Great Britain, we can kind of get a feel for how the might start behaving in America in the future. So, for this reason, I'm bringing up a ninja sword ban that is apparently happening in Great Britain. On Thursday, socialist dictator Keir Starmer put out the following statement on X, quote, Confirmed. Ninja swords will be banned by this summer. When we promise action, we take it. Now, Keir Starmer was not joking when he said that. Britain is actually passing a law that bans ninja swords. That is the term that is being used. Ninja swords, believe it or not. The Independent reports, quote, So Great Britain has a very serious, very pressing ninja sword problem, and they're finally cracking down on it. The evil ninjas, they are no longer going to be allowed to run through the streets and terrorize people. The ninja reign of terror is over. Why are there so many evil ninjas on the loose in Great Britain? How did this ninja epidemic start? And what's the difference between a ninja sword and a normal... Regular guy sword, I don't know what you'd call it. The closest to an answer I could find came from the website gov.uk, which is the official page of the British government, which said this, quote, So if you have a knife that's 13 inches long or 25 inches long or whatever, you're probably not an evil ninja, so you're good. But if you have a knife that meets those parameters, then you could, you could be an evil ninja. So then you need to hand over your knife. And this law, I'm warning you now, is not going to be well received in the ninja community. They're not going to like this. Before they go out at night to do evil ninja things like stab random people, they're going to have to take out their tape measures and carefully measure their murder weapons to make sure they meet the legal parameters before they go out to commit murder. Because, say what you will, about evil ninjas, they do respect the law. Not laws against stabbing people, but other laws. So sadly, a lot of evil ninjas, they will be measuring their blades before they go out on their killing sprees and say, Oh no, my ninja sword is 18 inches long. It would be illegal to kill people with this ninja sword. And I want to make sure I'm following the law. Don't want to get in trouble or anything. And then these poor, dejected ninjas will shuffle out to their local knife surrender location and surrender their knives, and then they'll have to run into Cabela's or Lowe's or whatever to buy a knife that meets the legal parameters before they go on their next stabbing spree. So now, if you're ever in England and an evil ninja drags you into an alleyway, pins you against a wall, and tries to slit your throat with a suspiciously large knife, just gently explain to him that what he's doing is actually, actually, it's illegal. Oh, you mean I'm not supposed to be doing this? I'm supposed to not murder people? This is illegal? There's a law against this? Sorry, I didn't know this was not legal. Thanks for the heads up. And then he'll leave you alone and your life will be saved. So now you know what to do if you ever encounter an evil ninja in England. This is what the supporters of this law think. This is a glimpse inside the delusional fantasy world British and American leftists who want to control guns and now control knives live in. Because make no mistake, this ninja sword ban isn't easy. any stupider than any gun control law we have in America, it's just as likely that a would-be school shooter would decide not to commit mass murder because he has an illegal gun, as it's likely that a ninja won't stab someone to death because his knife is the wrong size. The likelihood of both of those things is approximately 0%. Every law that bans or restricts the use of any weapon or dangerous object gun, knife, or ninja sword, makes the insane assumption that criminals who have so much disrespect for the law they're willing to slaughter innocent people will somehow care about laws prohibiting them from having certain weapons. That's what the brainiacs who want gun control think in America and the brainiacs who want knife control in Britain think. It's the same exact logic. They think that by outlawing inanimate objects, they can reduce the number of murders because the murderers won't be able to use the objects they've outlawed to kill people. By that logic, All Keir Starmer, all American Democrats need to do to end all murders overnight is just to outlaw every single gun, knife, axe, fork, spoon, carrot peeler, nunchuck, pair of scissors, and any other object a criminal could conceivably use to kill someone. Just ban them all. Then the murderers will be frantically looking around for a legal object to kill someone with, but they won't be able to find one, so all violence violent crime will instantly end and Britain and America and any country that does this will become an instant utopia. By their logic, that's all you have to do to end violent crime, because this is the same logic they're using to justify banning certain guns and banning certain knives. It's ridiculous. And that's certainly insane enough, but believe it or not, weapon control actually gets even stupider than that. Because not only have you stopped precisely zero murders by passing a law like this, you will actually increase the number of murders and increase violent crime. Because there's only one group of people in the whole world who cares at all about following gun and knife control regulations. That group of people are the law-abiding citizens of your country. The law-abiding citizens because they don't want to get in trouble, will follow your stupid laws. They'll take their knives to the knife surrender bin or whatever. They'll stop buying the weapons you outlaw, reluctantly, but they'll stop buying them. But the criminals, who as we discussed, do not care in the slightest about any law, won't do any of that. So weapon control laws not only don't stop criminals, they help them get away with even more crimes. They give criminals a virtual monopoly on whatever weapon is being outlawed. You are giving criminals a monopoly on the outlawed weapons while you make it infinitely harder for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves against the criminals you've emboldened. It's like in a war. Say World War II. The Allies decide they are not going to use tanks, they are not going to use fighter jets, because both of those things kill people. Okay, good luck convincing Hitler not to use tanks and fighter jets. That's a way to lose a war instantly. It's the exact same logic. It's dumb every place you try to apply it. It is so dumb. Now, of course, I don't think all the gun and knife control leftists are this off the charts ignorant. A lot of them understand all of this full well. They don't actually think any murderer is going to care about Keir Starmer's stupid ninja sword law. But here's what they do understand. The more weapons you confiscate from law-abiding citizens, the less they can resist you and your power and your power. That is what gun control, knife control, and any weapon control law is about. It is about taking away the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves against the government. It is about making resistance to tyranny harder and close to impossible. So what could Keir Starmer do if he actually wanted to reduce crime? I don't know. Maybe stop letting in all the Muslim jihadis and all the people from North Africa and Iran into your country by the millions. Ever thought of that, Kir? Maybe stop importing all of these third world people to invade and take over your country. How about that? How about you try that? So I would not be surprised if in a couple of years American leftists start pushing for knife control. What would surprise me is if Americans don't resist it. Because I think that unlike in Great Britain, America with its stronger Second Amendment tradition, its stronger tradition of individualism and individual rights and the right of self-defense is not going to take it. Americans will not put up with this insanity. We are different than the British. But all the same, now more than ever, it is very important to educate voters on the importance of the Second Amendment and the importance of the right of self-defense. And this story is a great opportunity to realize just how ridiculous the logic behind weapon control truly is. Thanks for listening to this episode of The Conservative Rebel. Please subscribe to our podcast, leave a like, and share. I'll see you on the next episode.