‘The moment that's going to stay with me for the rest of my life’: Auron MacIntyre on Trump’s unforgettable State of the Union



In his nearly two-hour State of the Union address last night, President Trump celebrated what he described as an extraordinary "turnaround for the ages" in his leadership, declaring America now "bigger, better, richer, and stronger than ever" amid a booming economy marked by declining inflation, reduced gas and mortgage rates, rising wages, and a tightly secured border with no illegal entries reported in recent months.

He spotlighted aggressive immigration enforcement measures, stood firm on his tariff strategy, cautioned Iran against pursuing nuclear weapons while favoring diplomatic paths, floated new proposals like universal retirement savings access and curbs on institutional home buying, paid tribute to military veterans and the Olympic hockey squad, delivered pointed critiques of Democrats and previous administrations, and painted an optimistic picture of renewed national strength heading into the midterm elections.

But there was one singular moment that BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre says was genuinely unforgettable.

“The moment that's going to stay with me for the rest of my life is watching Iryna Zarutska’s mother with Erica Kirk and just the pain on her face in that moment and the fact that Democrats could not even in that moment summon a shred of humanity,” he says.

“I still don’t think that we have dealt with the psychic trauma again of that one-two punch of Charlie Kirk and Iryna Zarutska, and so I think that [Trump] highlighting that and, you know, showing the grief that is still there for that mother and knowing that we need justice, we need to end political violence, we need to end the soft-on-crime policy — I think those were all incredibly strong moments for him,” he adds.

Fellow BlazeTV host and SOTU panel member Steve Deace agrees that this was one of the most powerful, albeit enraging, moments of the entire event.

He points to a viral tweet from Turning Point USA Chief Operating Officer Tyler Bowyer that shined a spotlight on the depths of Democrats’ hypocrisy.

Deace calls the close-up snapshot a “devastating” blow to Democrats.

“It’s a post of one of the Democrat members of Congress who did not want to stand during [the honoring of Anna Zarutska], and he’s got a Ukraine flag on his lapel. If that is not a portrait of where we are,” he scoffs.

“This is what the Democrats actually think of the Ukrainian people,” says guest and senior editor at Human Events Jack Posobiec.

To hear more, watch the video below.

This restaurant's surprise reply to unpatriotic HuffPost article takes the gold



After an incredibly eventful week of Olympic victories for Team USA, one leftist outlet got what it had coming when it said that feeling patriotic was "yucky."

While hundreds of accounts roasted the author and the article, one three-word reply from a restaurant stole the spotlight and left the HuffPost the clear loser in the exchange.

'This is the only acceptable response to HuffPost.'

HuffPost's original post on Saturday, captioned, "If waving the American flag or chanting 'USA' turns you off right now, you're not alone," received a simple comment from Jimmy's Famous Seafood.

"Go f**k yourself," the family-owned restaurant's account said Sunday.

RELATED: HuffPost gets absolutely scorched over article saying Olympics patriotism feels 'yucky'

Photo by Carolyn Van Houten/Washington Post/Getty Images

Many major accounts announced that Jimmy's Famous Seafood had earned a follow in the wake of the viral reply.

"This is the only acceptable response to HuffPost," Nick Sortor said.

"Okay do you have locations in Florida patriot?" BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre asked.

"Only one location — family owned and operated. We ship to all 50 states however!" the account replied.

Jimmy's Famous Seafood is based in Baltimore, Maryland, where it has been operating since 1974.

At the time of writing, Jimmy's Famous Seafood had just under 360,000 followers on X. Its reply received over 13 million views, compared to 10 million views of HuffPost's original article.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The REAL reason Disney Gay Days are fizzling out (it’s not the boycotts everyone thinks)



After 35 years, it appears that Disney Gay Days — the annual LGBTQ+ event where participants, their families, friends, and allies visit the Walt Disney World parks and wear red shirts for visibility — are on their last legs.

The group that organizes the event recently announced that shifting hotel agreements and the loss of key sponsors forced it to cancel the 2026 celebration. Although organizers are encouraging gay fans to visit the parks on the usual dates and wear themed attire, the coordinated celebration appears to be on its way to history’s ash heap.

Some people, particularly in Christian outlets, are claiming that boycotts are behind the sponsorship losses that led to the 2026 pause of the organized Gay Days events at Disney, but BlazeTV Auron MacIntyre disagrees.

“Evangelical Christians tried to cancel Gay Days with an on-again-off-again boycott for decades. What finally wounded the LGBTQ leviathan wasn't conservative activism. It was cultural apathy,” he says.

“I remember the first wave of evangelical pushback as Disney began signaling support for homosexual lifestyles in the 1990s,” says Auron.

But it was a “strangely inconsistent boycott,” he says.

“One year, the Southern Baptist Convention urged members to avoid Disney. The next year, churches were showing up to the Night of Joy, Disney's Christian music festival.”

As a result of this “sloppy, intermittent resistance,” Disney "leaned in harder” to its pro-homosexuality agenda, moving "from park celebrations and employee benefits” to “progressive messaging” in its cinematography.

“'The Little Mermaid' became black, gay couples were kissing in 'Star Wars,' and diverse girlbosses dominated Marvel. As acceptance of gay marriage shifted from taboo to required corporate orthodoxy, Disney replaced entertainment with propaganda,” says Auron.

Thus the fading of Gay Days had nothing to do with either Christian resistance or a rolling back of support from Disney.

Auron says that "apathy" is why Gay Days “suddenly [fell] apart.”

“Apathy doesn't mean that Americans suddenly disapproved of Disney's agenda sadly. It just means that normal people stopped granting it the honor of a fight,” he explains.

“Many families quit watching new releases, not as part of a coordinated boycott, but because the product became preachy, weird, and dull. Others kept their subscriptions but tuned out of the messaging and rolled their eyes. Either way, the ritualized drama lost its electricity.”

“Corporate sponsors,” says Auron, “follow attention, and attention follows the next outrage.”

“A movement built on being shocking can't survive once it becomes background noise.”

So what’s the lesson here?

Citing Machiavelli’s “The Prince,” Auron says, rulers must “leave opponents alone or crush them entirely. A complacent enemy might grumble, but they avoid taking risks; a crushed enemy can't retaliate. The most dangerous enemy is one that has suffered a minor bloodying. He gains the motivation to fight and keeps the means to harm.”

“Conservatives gave the LGBTQ movement exactly that minor bloodying — outrage finger-wagging, but never any real consequences,” he explains.

The “LGBTQ leviathan” responsible for Disney Gay Days, he argues, “didn't lose because the right defeated it; it lost because it exhausted its own cultural energy.”

“The lesson here is pretty simple,” says Auron. “If the right fights, it must pick battles carefully and commit fully to winning them. ... If you fight, you must crush the enemy's capacity to operate; otherwise, you invigorate his cause while draining your own. Clumsy half measures feed your foe, and you end up hoping he defeats himself.”

To hear more, watch the video above.

Want more from Auron MacIntyre?

To enjoy more of this YouTuber and recovering journalist's commentary on culture and politics, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Leaked recording: State Department official admits demographics are used to rig elections



A leaked undercover recording has exposed one State Department official saying the quiet part out loud: Demographics determine elections, which is why the powers that be are so focused on changing America’s.

“We actually have a guy from the State Department on tape saying, ‘Yeah, this is the purpose of this. This is the Democrats. This is what they’re doing. They’re using the Great Replacement to rig elections. They want the country to be less white because white people vote Republican. White people are conservatives,’” BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre says on “The Auron MacIntyre Show,” before sharing the clip from Project Veritas.

In the clip, the State Department official claims that “they want to change the demographics of the United States.”


“Project Veritas has an undercover guy speaking with a State Department official, and he comes out and says, ‘Look, it’s really simple. White guys in Nebraska, they’re not leftists. They’re conservatives. They’re naturally conservative,’” MacIntyre explains.

“And they’re not going to vote for radical leftist policies. They don’t want it. So, what do you do in a liberal democracy? What do you do if you’re the Democrats and you need to push this radical progressive agenda, but the native population isn’t really interested? And the answer is, you replace them,” he says.

“And by the way, this has been the policy of the left for basically ever. They’ve recognized this dynamic for a long time. Leftism cannot win in America. It is not sustainable in America without replacing the population,” he continues.

“They want to replace you because of your race,” he adds. “They want to replace you because of the color of your skin.”

Want more from Auron MacIntyre?

To enjoy more of this YouTuber and recovering journalist's commentary on culture and politics, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

'Subhuman ghouls': People, WaPo trash Scott Adams hours after his death



On Tuesday, Scott Adams, the creator of the beloved comic strip "Dilbert," died after a prolonged battle with metastatic prostate cancer. However, some of his opponents in media wasted no time before criticizing Adams and his accomplishments.

Hours after it was announced that Adams had died, People magazine published an article titled "Scott Adams, Disgraced Dilbert Creator, Dies at 68."

'You are the scum of the earth.'

The author then claimed in the very first paragraph that Adams "degraded Black people in a 2023 rant."

People updated the article at 12:33 p.m. ET, including changing the author of the piece. The updated version says it was written by "People Staff."

RELATED: Beloved 'Dilbert' creator Scott Adams dies at age 68

Photo by Bob Riha Jr./Getty Images

However, an earlier, archived version of the article timestamped at 10:47 a.m. ET shows that it was written by Victoria Edel, as many X users, including Eric Daugherty, made sure to emphasize.

Several prominent X users did not try to hide their disgust over the tasteless headline.

"Subhuman ghouls," BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre said in a reply to People's post.

"You are the scum of the earth," Raw Egg Nationalist wrote.

People's original X post promoting the article also appears to have been deleted.

Other news outlets couldn't resist the opportunity to drag Adams through the mud either.

An archived article originally published from the Washington Post and apparently shared later by the Boston Globe bore the headline, "Scott Adams, ‘Dilbert’ creator who veered into racist, far-right commentary, dies."

Just like the People article, this article wasted no time attacking Adams' right-wing views. The first paragraph reads: "Scott Adams, who became a hero to millions of cubicle-dwelling office workers as the creator of the satirical comic strip 'Dilbert,' only to rebrand himself as a digital provocateur — at home in the Trump era’s right-wing mediasphere — with inflammatory comments about race, politics and identity, died Jan. 13."

For evidence, critics point to a February 22, 2023, stream of Adams' show, "Real Coffee with Scott Adams." The "rant" that they are referring to involves Adams' discussion of a Rasmussen poll of black Americans responding to the statement "it's okay to be white." Fifty-three percent agreed, 26% disagreed, and 21% were not sure about the statement.

Adams took issue with the fact that nearly half of black Americans did not agree with that statement. He said in part, "If nearly half of all blacks are not okay with white people … that's a hate group. I don't want to have anything to do with them. And I would say, based on the current way things are going, the best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from black people ... because there is no fixing this."

Adams' critics failed to mention that he went on to encourage his viewers to be "friendly" to everyone and that he was not trying to "start a war" with anyone.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Young white Americans want their own identity politics now — and conservatives shouldn’t be surprised



After years of DEI, affirmative action, and replacement-level immigration, some young white Americans are beginning to demand political representation as a group. Conservatives are panicking about this rise in “white identity politics,” but they shouldn’t be surprised at all, says BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre.

“For decades, whites have watched every other group in America successfully demand political action as a block from both the left and the right. Democrats build their entire party around racial grievance, but even conservatives are quick to speak to the needs of minority communities as a collective group,” Auron says.

Even though conservatives are typically anti-identity politics, they nonetheless “cater to them for any group except their core constituency: white Americans.”

Now some of those white Americans are saying, “Enough — we demand the same treatment.”

Massive immigration has brought in large groups of people who naturally stick together ethnically and gain advantages through nepotism and tribalism, Auron explains. This makes pure individual merit, which whites are forced to rely on, a losing strategy, especially when they’re already demonized for their race by universities, corporations, and media outlets.

For years the message has been: “[Whites] aren't allowed to advocate as a group like everyone else gets to, but they are allowed to be punished as a group.”

The fact that some whites are now calling for ethnic representation is merely “predictable results,” Auron says.

“If conservatives were serious about stopping the rise of collective white identity politics, they would stop lecturing young white people for noticing the obvious. They would instead attack the systemic bias against whites in corporations and academia. ... If they were serious, conservatives would initiate an immigration moratorium and would aggressively prosecute ethnic cartels in the United States,” he continues.

“Conservative leaders should be lecturing blacks, Indians, Hispanics, and Jews just as aggressively as they lecture whites about ethnocentrism, if for no other reason than whites, you know, actually vote for the GOP, while all these other groups — outside of Hispanic males in the last election — vote overwhelmingly Democrat.”

“In short, show young white people that they can succeed without ethnocentrism by actually addressing and punishing ethnocentrism that is currently practiced by every other group here in the United States. Gather your courage and talk to the minorities who are already practicing the very behavior you claim to fear.”

To hear more of Auron’s commentary and analysis, watch the video above.

Want more from Auron MacIntyre?

To enjoy more of this YouTuber and recovering journalist's commentary on culture and politics, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The Great Replacement isn’t a theory. It’s the plan.



The Great Replacement theory is a conjecture popularized by French writer Renaud Camus in his 2011 book, “Le Grand Remplacement,” claiming that globalist elites are deliberately orchestrating mass immigration of non-white people into Western countries to demographically replace and ultimately disempower or even eradicate white European populations.

It’s often branded as a far-right conspiracy theory, but just look at the evidence:

  • Mass illegal immigration is orchestrated or deliberately enabled under progressive administrations, despite polls indicating that most citizens want less immigration.
  • Skyrocketing housing costs, student debt, stagnant wages, and taxes make it nearly impossible for young white/middle-class natives to afford children, while many immigrant households (legal and illegal) get access to welfare, EITC, child tax credits, Medicaid, and housing aid that effectively subsidize higher fertility or larger families.
  • Politicians, corporate media, and advertising openly celebrate that the country is becoming “majority-minority,” cheering it as a moral and cultural improvement.
  • Anyone who complains about the speed or scale of immigration (even mildly) gets instantly branded “racist,” “white supremacist,” or “xenophobic,” faces censorship, bans, and job cancellation, and is shut out of respectable discourse.

So it’s not just a theory. It’s a scheme that’s very much in action right now.

“Demographic replacement of the American stock is the plan in order to manipulate elections in the democracy,” says Auron MacIntyre, BlazeTV host of “The Auron MacIntyre Show.”

He plays a clip from White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller telling Sean Hannity the same thing.

“The Biden administration, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, devised a scheme to fly illegal aliens into the country and then to escort them en masse across the border by the millions and to give them something known as parole, which gives them a work permit, which gives them a Social Security number, which gives them access to the voting booth,” Miller declared. “This was the plan all along.”

To its core, the plan is deeply undemocratic, MacIntyre explains. “The whole idea of the democracy is that it represents the beliefs and will of the people and that the popular sovereignty is supposed to guide the politicians,” he says.

“So if instead of the popular sovereignty guiding the politicians, the politicians [via immigration] can create and manufacture popular sovereignty in their favor, then they can control the entire system.”

And that’s exactly what the Democrat Party wants, he says — to secure all future elections by turning the nation into a blue blob of welfare-dependents who will reliably vote Democrat to keep their benefits.

“[The Great Replacement theory] is not a conspiracy theory. This is not some weird internet idea. This is the plan of the Democratic Party. This is what they want. This is their political strategy,” MacIntyre reiterates.

The masses of immigrants from Afghanistan, Somalia, and Venezuela — they’re “here for a reason,” he insists. “They’re here to replace you.”

“You address this, or the country drowns.”

To hear Auron’s in-depth breakdown of the Great Replacement theory, watch the video above.

Want more from Auron MacIntyre?

To enjoy more of this YouTuber and recovering journalist's commentary on culture and politics, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The Economist declares war on white babies



Despite the fact that America is in a fertility crisis — the worst ever recorded in the nation’s history — the Economist published a sardonic article on November 6 titled “Make America procreate again: Among the MAGA fertility fanatics.”

Through a cynical and patronizing lens, author Barclay Bram explored the right-wing-propelled pro-natalist movement spearheaded by “tech bros and religious conservatives” who champion having more babies. He cited the Nation’s Joan Walsh — a radical leftist who authored a book titled “What’s the Matter with White People?” — to capture the left’s perspective on this movement: “an insidious project to create a whiter America.”

“White children are the most evil thing that the left can imagine,” says BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre.

While lefties would surely deny this, their actions speak volumes — specifically their action of “importing” and protecting illegal immigrants, which they argue is the solution to the country’s plummeting birth rate. But Auron sees through their lies.

“They have no interest in you continuing to exist because they want to replace you,” he says frankly.

Bram’s piece opens with an anecdote recounting his time with a 32-year-old single trucker named Tim Adkinson at NatalCon, a pro-natalist conference in Austin, Texas. He’s painted as a pitiable, desperate figure for his ambition to rear children, and the convention is framed as a pathetic gathering of weirdos — tech bros, religious zealots, and lonely conservatives — desperately trying to engineer a "baby boom" amid America's fertility collapse.

“[He’s] literally demonizing people who are trying to solve social problems that are keeping us from having families,” Auron says.

Bram went on to paint the billionaires investing in reproductive technologies and the Trump administration’s push for less expensive fertility drugs as futile attempts to manufacture more families.

“Why is this insidious?” asks Auron.

“Because white people might have kids,” he answers. “That's why it's evil. Yeah, they care about the future of the United States. Yes, they're working to reduce drug prices and create situations where people can stay home with their children … but oh, some of those people might be white. And that's the problem.”

Not only is this overtly racist, it’s also illogical. If we’re serious about fixing the country’s fertility crisis (and the left claims it is), then more white babies are inevitable, as “white people are still the majority in America,” says Auron.

“But the Economist hates white people. It hates white babies. It doesn't want white people to have children. They are interested in ethnic cleansing. That's what they support.”

Bram’s article also mentioned (without critique) the protesters who rallied against NatalCon attendees: “A group of protesters, their faces mostly covered, gathered in the museum courtyard. 'Nazis off our campus!' they screamed through a megaphone as conference attendees streamed in. One sign read 'Eugenicists' with the word 'Natalists' crossed through.”

Auron makes it plain: “So if you want to have babies, you are a Nazi. You are doing Nazi race science if you would desire that Americans have more children. And this really just lays it bare. ... Every white baby could be a Nazi. Whiteness is something that is inherently fascist, right? Nazism is sitting in white DNA, so we've got to get rid of the white people so we get rid of the Nazis.”

“I keep having to hear there is no great replacement theory … no attempts to push white people out of the United States … except for the article is explicitly stating that every white child is an atrocity.”

To hear Auron’s full breakdown of Bram’s article, watch the full episode above.

Want more from Auron MacIntyre?

To enjoy more of this YouTuber and recovering journalist's commentary on culture and politics, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Tolkien’s forgotten lesson: Evil wins when good men refuse to rule



Since the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Auron MacIntyre, BlazeTV host of “The Auron MacIntyre Show,” has been calling for conservatives to get serious about crushing left-wing violence. Inaction, he’s warned, will only invite escalation. That’s why as a political party, we must insist that the Trump administration dismantle Antifa, impose severe consequences on those inciting or celebrating murders, and wage economic war via regulatory and legal levers against complicit media.

In other words, the Trump administration needs to use its power to obliterate left-wing chaos.

Auron gets quite a bit of pushback for this stance. Many will use J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy to argue against the use of power to quell evil. “The one ring is dangerous. ... You must reject the call of power because ultimately power corrupts and destroys and divides,” they say.

But Auron says this is a “shallow reading” of the father of modern fantasy’s three-volume series. “Ultimately, while yes, there is a message about power in there, there’s also a message about right authority. The last book is, of course, called ‘Return of the King,’ and this is seen as a good thing,” he counters. “So it doesn’t look like Tolkien is ultimately rejecting the use of power, but he does have some very important things to say about the nature of power.”

To discuss this important distinction, Auron speaks with Evan Cooney, the host and creator of “The Middle-earth Mixer” — a popular podcast that dives into J.R.R. Tolkien's lore, themes, and Middle-earth universe.

For starters, Tolkien was adamantly opposed to allegory, meaning that the one ring cannot be said to symbolize power alone. Further, in the books, “There is lawful use of lawful authority, which translates to power, that many characters have and have permissions to do so by the creator god Ilúvatar, and then there are characters who commit unlawful use of unlawful authority, and Sauron creating the one ring would be a perfect example of that,” says Cooney.

Auron points to Aragorn, the rightful king of Gondor, as an example. Initially, Aragorn, using the name Strider, runs from his destiny. “And because he's not in that position of the true king, there are others who are less worthy who are ruling in his place,” says Auron. This is seen by characters and readers alike as a bad thing. Aragorn must wear the crown and wield the sword and scepter, as this is what pushes back darkness and brings order to Middle-earth.

Cooney, unpacking Aragorn’s lineage all the way back to Isildur, who initially took the ring of power from Sauron, says, “This shirking of responsibility from everyone involved and [Arvedui’s, the last king of the North] inability to take power created the political disaster that made for why men were so weak by the time you get to the ‘Fellowship of the Ring.”’

“Ultimately, Tolkien recognizes that power will exist, that this void will be filled, and if it's not filled with the appropriate people, the worthy people, those who belong in the line ... you will be ruled by inferior men,” says Auron. “It's not that you won't be ruled; it’s that the stewards are there instead of the kings.”

In the kingdom of Gondor, Denethor — a steward charged with holding the throne in trust until the king returns — is consumed by pride and despair. He refuses to rally with allies, distrusts Aragorn’s claim to the throne, and abandons the city in its darkest hour.

In Rohan, however, King Théoden, who Cooney says is Denethor’s character foil, shows us what it looks like to wield power rightly. With the help of Gandalf, he exiles his corrupt adviser, Gríma Wormtongue — “the quintessential archetype for the sneaky government bureaucrat,” says Cooney — and rides out and meets Sauron’s army in the Battle of the Pelennor Fields.

The exile of Gríma, says Auron, is a lesson for our current government: “The council [of bureaucrats] is paralyzing. It's meant to be paralyzing. It's meant to stop you from taking your rightful authority and taking the honorable action, and you have to remove that influence.”

Once evil advisers have been banished, the next step is to step fully into the role of rightful power. After Gríma is exiled, the first thing Gandalf has Théoden do is pick up his sword. “Your fingers would remember their old strength better, if they grasped your sword,” he tells the old king.

“It’s a very moving symbol,” says Auron.

“What stirs the king back to a noble action is he has to feel the weight of the instrument of his office. The rightful sword he has been entrusted with as the civil magistrate has to be felt in his hand before he can once again truly return to who he is and behave honorably.”

To hear the full conversation, watch the episode above.

Want more from Auron MacIntyre?

To enjoy more of this YouTuber and recovering journalist's commentary on culture and politics, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Is there a biblical case for public vengeance?



Most Christians will argue that it’s impossible to make a biblical case for vengeance. They hold tight to the belief that it’s their job to forgive — no matter how egregious or relentless the crimes coming against them.

This has certainly been the sentiment of most believers following the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. Even though the left’s inherently violent ideologies have continued to create chaos and disorder, many Christians believe their sacred duty to forgive contradicts the idea of taking reciprocal action.

BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre, however, says we’ve got it twisted. “That's not really a reflection of what Christian society has said about justice, what the Bible says about justice, and the role that the government plays in this process.”

Is it possible, then, to make a biblical case for vengeance?

On a recent episode of “The Auron MacIntyre Show,” Auron and guest Timon Cline from American Reformer dove into this query.

Christians, Timon says, are “precluded from taking private vengeance for people who wrong us in a private way.”

“The Bible's very clear on this. We are supposed to forgive. We are supposed to be long-suffering. We're supposed to have our sort of consciousness of these actions even against us understood in light of eternity and in providence and so on and so forth,” he says. “But the public man, the magistrate, the one who has authority, is supposed to have a very different perspective on these things, especially threats against his citizens, threats to disorder, violence.”

In Romans 13, Paul writes, “For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.”

But what happens when our governing authorities fail to carry out their divine duty as executives of justice? “You will suggest that people can get away with [crime]; you will multiply the violence,” says Cline.

The other result, says Auron, is that citizens “will seek private vengeance” — something that is strictly forbidden for the Christian.

The duo examine the case of Charlie Kirk’s murder. Auron and Timon agree that justice against the murderer isn’t sufficient. Even though the suspect has been called a lone gunman, he didn’t really act alone. A “terror network” of violent NGOs, billionaire donors, and radical left-wing media figures and politicians spurred him to act. Justice, they argue, means targeting that entire insidious system.

This is what “public vengeance” means.

It’s “perfectly justified” and is, “in fact, good for Christians” to demand that the government seek public vengeance, says Timon, because believers are supposed to be “enemies of disorder and corruption.”

While some Christians might get hung up on the word “vengeance,” Auron says they need to understand that this doesn’t look like pitchfork-wielding mobs of citizens setting fire to the institutions of their enemies. Citizens still refrain from taking justice into their own hands, but they can and should demand that the government fulfill its God-ordained role to exercise justice, understanding that justice for certain crimes — like terror networks spawning widespread violence — must be met with widespread vengeance.

“That doesn't mean that we are reveling in violence or torture” but rather “recognizing … that clemency itself is a crime against the victim if it's done by the magistrate,” Auron explains.

To hear more of the conversation, watch the full interview above.

Want more from Auron MacIntyre?

To enjoy more of this YouTuber and recovering journalist's commentary on culture and politics, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.