John McWhorter and I had planned to spend at least part of yesterday’s livestream talking about Martin Luther King, in belated celebration of the holiday. But with more terrible news out of Minneapolis and a Davos conference that may have previewed a major reorganization of the global economic order, we found ourselves drawn away from the legacy of past events and toward the uncertainties of the present and future. This video consists of the first half of our two-hour stream. We’ll make the Q&A available to full subscribers on Sunday.
These livestreams will now be available only to full subscribers, both as they happen and later in video and podcast form. We’ll release shorter segments to the public later, but if you want the whole shebang, become a full subscriber today. The Glenn Show is almost entirely audience supported. We need your help in order to keep delivering the show week after week, along with all the other content we post here. So to those of you who are already full supporters: thank you for all you do. And if you’re not yet a supporter, please consider becoming one.
On Saturday, January 24, ICE agents shot and killed Alex Pretti during a protest on the streets on Minneapolis. While Pretti had a holstered handgun on his person, which law enforcement reports that he was licensed to carry, video appears to capture several agents restraining and disarming Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse, as the fatal shots were fired.
This is the second fatal shooting of a protestor in Minneapolis this month, and I sincerely hope that local and federal agencies will investigate both with due rigor and objectivity. Both John and I are, of course, quite dismayed by these horrific events, but that response begs a very important question: Should ICE and CBP be out in force in Minneapolis, or anywhere, at all?
John wants to know why, despite these agencies’ claims that they’re targeting undocumented immigrants with criminal records, they seem to be rounding up regular working people who pose no threat to anyone. While I agree that such people shouldn’t be at the top of the list for deportation, or even the middle of the list, they still entered the country illegally. Trump was re-elected, in large measure, on the promise to deport anyone in the country without authorization to be here. As an advocate for strong, secure borders, I can’t fault him for enforcing the law, even if I also think he’s taking a harsh and indiscriminate approach to the job.
As I say in the video, when traffic cops are enforcing the rules of the road, it makes no sense to pull over every single driver who creeps a few miles per hour above the speed limit. That’s a poor use of limited resources and it will impede the basic function of the community. Pull over the speed demons doing 65 in a school zone. And yet, even those who only barely break the speed limit are, undeniably, guilty of speeding. Likewise, while I don’t think it’s a good idea to deport undocumented immigrants who are just trying to earn a living before those who commit serious criminal offenses, neither can I argue that the former have any legal right to be here.
John and I then move onto Davos, where Canada’s prime minister, Mark Carney, threw down the gauntlet, invoking Vaclav Havel’s concept of “living within the lie” to describe the fictional status of the present international order. Carney’s speech was an eloquent but unsubtle rebuke to Trump’s assertion of regional hegemony, and especially of his stated intention to buy Greenland, whether or not it’s for sale. In effect, he announced that if the US is going to coerce other nations into doing its bidding with tariffs and shows of force, the proper response is a pivot away from over-reliance on America and toward pragmatic deals with interested parties (i.e., China), no matter their strategic rivalries.
John saw Trump’s Davos response and his speeches at the conference as business-as-usual: the agitated outbursts of a greedy child. As you might guess, I think the situation is more complex. Whatever one thinks of the wisdom of acquiring Greenland, there is an economic logic for doing so. While I think the US has a right to be concerned about what happens in its backyard, we can’t expect that there won’t be consequences when we take action. Carney’s speech hinted at what those consequences might look like.
