Candace Owens Explains Why She Says F Ukraine and Why America Must Put Itself First
Enjoying this? Share it with someone who needs to see it.
Up Next
Niall Ferguson Explores Two Competing Historical Narratives of Donald Trump's Political Legacy and Impact
6:40
Charlie Kirk Explains Why the US-UK Relationship Under Trump Is Stronger Than Ever
1:54
Charlie Kirk and Vivek Ramaswamy Confront White Dudes for Harris and Debate Immigration at Georgia State University
44:10
Candace Owens Explains Why She Says F Ukraine and Why America Must Put Itself First
Candace Owens doesn't mince words when it comes to American foreign policy. In this conversation, she argues passionately that the United States should prioritize its own citizens over international conflicts, particularly Ukraine. While Republican debate candidates competed to show concern for foreign nations, Owens saw a disconnect with everyday Americans struggling with crime, inflation, and illegal immigration. She challenges the post-World War II doctrine of international liberalism, questioning why American tax dollars fund LGBTQ agendas in Pakistan while streets in Los Angeles descend into chaos. Her position is clear: no American lives should be lost on foreign soil until America's own house is in order. The discussion tackles tough questions about China, Taiwan, Putin, and what a truly America-first foreign policy would actually look like in practice.
September 14, 2023
The Republican Debate Disconnect
Candace Owens recalls watching the Republican debates with frustration as candidates like Chris Christie, Mike Pence, and Nikki Haley competed to demonstrate their commitment to Ukraine and international policing. She found it absurd that these establishment politicians were trying to make Americans cry for people in Ukraine while ignoring the crises in their own backyards.
The notion that America can "do both" - take care of its own citizens while policing the world - is laughable to Owens. She points to the streets of Los Angeles as evidence that America clearly cannot do both. The courage to stand against establishment and mainstream media narratives, she argues, requires understanding what people are actually feeling versus what politicians think sounds good on a debate stage.
F Ukraine: A Mother's Perspective on Priorities
Owens is unapologetic about her "F Ukraine" stance and says she would have said it directly on the debate stage. Her reasoning comes from a simple parental analogy: if someone told a mother to care more about what's happening in the neighbor's house while her own children were suffering, that mother would rightfully call them crazy.
She catalogues the problems plaguing ordinary Americans: people can't afford to put food on the table, gas and grocery prices are crushing families, crime is surging, illegal immigration is out of control, and American daughters are being raped and killed by illegal immigrants. She specifically mentions a woman horrifically killed in Arizona while going for a run by an illegal immigrant.
The logic is straightforward: take care of your own house first. Only after your house is in perfect order should you consider helping others. But when your house is in complete chaos and your kids can't eat, it's outrageous for anyone to tell you it's wrong to prioritize your own family first.
The Arrogance of International Liberalism
Owens traces America's current foreign policy problems to the post-World War II doctrine of international liberalism - the idea that America must spread its values everywhere and everyone must accept them. But she poses a challenging question: maybe people don't want to live like Americans want to live.
She points to Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia as examples of countries whose populations may not be interested in adopting American or Californian lifestyles. And given what's currently happening in California and Los Angeles, she questions whether American values and principles are even worth purchasing right now if you were another country.
Uganda's laws attempting to keep out the LGBTQ agenda that Americans are funding worldwide serve as one example. Owens challenges why American tax dollars are funding efforts to teach girls in Pakistan about transgenderism. This foolishness, she argues, stems from the arrogance of international liberalism - and it's not even representative of what average Americans think.
The average American doesn't believe kindergarteners need to learn about 75,000 genders. America isn't even impressive academically anymore, with kids getting systematically dumber. The country has nothing to show for all the money spent around the world while America itself is in full decline.
Beyond Ukraine: F Everybody Until We Fix Our House
Owens clarifies that her position isn't just "F Ukraine" - it's "F everybody" until America gets its house in order. When challenged about China potentially attacking Taiwan and the implications for semiconductor chips and manufacturing, she stands firm: zero American lives should die on foreign soil.
The discussion exposes the complexity of modern global interdependence. Six percent of products manufactured in China, Apple's manufacturing, semiconductor chips - all create vulnerability. But Owens maintains her position even when pressed on the practical implications.
The Owens Doctrine: What Her Foreign Policy Would Look Like
If Candace Owens were president, what would her foreign policy actually be? She admits she's giving the "Owens Doctrine" off the cuff and acknowledges that in reality, you'd need to build a cabinet with people smarter than you in specific areas to work through these issues.
On Putin and Russia, Owens argues that pushing Putin into the arms of the East has been the worst possible approach. Putin should be a natural ally with the West, she contends. The Cold War narrative is outdated - we're not in the 1960s anymore. Putin isn't trying to rebuild the Soviet Union, he doesn't have the money, and the idea that Russia is America's biggest threat is a mainstream media simulation.
America has been expanding NATO onto everyone's borders and pushing eastward despite promises not to expand "one inch Eastward." The real dishonesty, according to Owens, is about the corruption and money laundering operation that Ukraine represents. Biden's interest through Burisma and the vested interests in the region have nothing to do with caring about Ukrainian soldiers or worrying about Soviet expansion.
When Trump sought a meaningful relationship with Putin to avoid pushing Russia into China's arms, that was the right policy. China actually poses a threat to the United States, Owens acknowledges. A peace policy that respects how countries want to run themselves while maintaining strategic relationships and partnerships makes sense.
National Sovereignty as the Foundation
Owens believes in national sovereignty. Russia has the right to run its country the way it wants. So do Iraq, Iran, America, and the United Kingdom. The European Union and concepts of globalization that dictate how everyone must think are problematic.
Even within America, there's no consensus on values and principles - the South differs dramatically from New York City and Los Angeles. If Americans can't agree among themselves, the idea of imposing a unified vision globally is absurd.
Strategic Partnerships vs. Foreign Wars
When pressed on whether her position means zero foreign policy whatsoever, Owens clarifies the distinction between involvement in foreign wars and strategic partnerships. She's not saying America shouldn't do business internationally or have ambassadors who negotiate. Diplomatic relations are actually what she's advocating for - more of them, in fact.
What she opposes is strong-arming countries, sending billions of dollars with no accounting, and involving American military forces. The Pentagon's admission about six billion dollars in missing or misaccounted funds illustrates the problem perfectly.
The comparison to software dependencies in business illustrates the challenge. Companies rely on third-party software they don't own, just as America relies on China for manufacturing, semiconductors, and countless products. The first iPhone 15 made in India represents progress, but it's still not made in America. A truly American-made iPhone might cost five thousand dollars instead of thirteen hundred.
Post-World War II, every American foreign intervention has been a disaster: Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Ukraine. While America doesn't necessarily have boots on the ground in Ukraine, the money, soft power, and influence still represent entanglement.
Owens acknowledges some nuance is necessary - it can't be absolute zero involvement. But the principle remains: diplomatic relations yes, American lives and unaccounted billions no. The contrast between spending 100 billion dollars on Ukraine while sending 700 dollars per family to Maui victims, with a couple thousand kids still missing, captures everything wrong with current priorities.
