Topic: White Slavery

Professor Stephanie Rogers of UC Berkeley claims that white women have historically invested in white supremacy to maintain social power. Her research links the economic investments of women in the institution of slavery to modern voting patterns, specifically the 51% of white women who supported Donald Trump. The hosts question the validity of her conclusions and the use of the term "white supremacy" in this context.

Filmmaker Michael Moore called for a cleansing of the "American soul" from white male privilege and racist greed. He argued that the United States was founded on genocide and slavery, and that Donald Trump is the inevitable result of a decades-long corporate takeover of democracy.

Michelle Obama's comment about living in a house built by slaves sparked a historical fact-check by Bill O'Reilly. O'Reilly noted that while slaves did work on the original White House, they were "well-fed." The discussion clarifies that the current White House was largely rebuilt after being burned by the British in 1814, complicating the "built by slaves" narrative.

The hosts compare the historical "naming and shaming" of prostitution clients in San Rafael during the 1970s with the legalized, regulated system in the Netherlands. They discuss a period in the East Bay where a court ruling effectively legalized the practice for several years. The conversation distinguishes between voluntary sex work and the "white slavery" involved in international human trafficking from the Baltic States and Russia.

A debate regarding Article 1, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution centers on whether the "three-fifths" clause was intended to dehumanize black people or to limit the political power of Southern slaveholders. While some argue the foundation of America is systemic racism, others contend the compromise was a Northern strategy to eventually abolish slavery by reducing the South's voting apportionment.

The hosts open the program by noting that January is National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month. They critique the White House's decision to raise the signature threshold for official petitions from 25,000 to 100,000, arguing that the administration never intended to act on the public's requests regardless of the volume.