WATCH: Dinesh D'Souza discusses the real dangers of anti-white rhetoric

As leftists are trying to portray "whiteness" an incurable ailment, conservative commentator Dinesh D'Souza explains that the left's violent rhetoric suggests that far-left activists are "issuing nothing less than an invitation to genocide."

A "plague of whiteness" is seeping across America, according to critical race theory. The pandemic-like terminology has surfaced during the public health crisis. Meanwhile, vaccines have become the remedy for COVID-19.

"Well, what's the cure for whiteness?" D'Souza questions.

D'Souza deconstructs the latest real world examples of anti-white racism in American academia. During the latest episode of the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast, the host of the eponymous show considers two telling documents, a psychologist's self-diagnosis and a Yale scholar's diatribe, "as evidence that the political left is now creating the framework to justify white genocide."

In an interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper last Monday, former President Barack Obama sought to downplay critical race theory's threat.

"You would think with all the public policy debates that are taking place right now that the Republican Party would be engaged in a significant debate about how are we going to deal with the economy and what are we going to do about climate change?" Obama stated, noting that the "single most important issue" to the GOP is critical race theory. "Who knew that that was the threat to our republic but those debates are powerful because they get at what story do we tell about ourselves."

"But I also think there are certain right-wing media venues, for example, that monetize and capitalize on stoking the fear and resentment of a white population that is witnessing a changing America and seeing demographic changes," he said.

Right-wing pundits are smeared by Obama as irresponsible fearmongers for igniting concern about "a nonexistent threat," D'Souza explains.

D'Souza then examines the psychology of the ideologues on the other side.

New York City-based psychiatrist Dr. Aruna Khilanani spoke at Yale University and discussed how she's had fantasies of killing white people. Khilanani spewed the race-hating remarks at the Ivy League institution's Child Study Center on April 6, noting that white people "are out of their minds and have been for a long time."

"We are calm. We are giving—too giving—and then when we get angry, [white people] use our responses as confirmation that we're crazy or have emotional problems," Khilanani stated. "Nothing makes me angrier than a white person who tells me not to be angry, because they have not seen real anger yet."

Referring to white people as a group, Khilanani said that talking about race is a waste of breath. "We are asking a demented, violent predator who thinks that they are a saint or a superhero to accept responsibility. It ain't gonna happen."

"I had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way, burying their body and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step," she detailed her own psychology.

D'Souza states that Khilanani's violent rhetoric is "hate speech if there ever is hate speech," observing the speech's content, the speaker's position as a credentialed psychologist, and the statement's venue at the Yale School of Medicine.

"I noticed that there's been no public repudiation, no public apologies," D'Souza says. "That means that the hate speech is embedded in influential institutions. So when the left talks about systemic racism, here it is. When they talk about hate speech that is systematized in our institutions of higher learning, here it is."

D'Souza points out that this type of hate speech is permitted, allowed and even encouraged to a degree. "Why? Because it's coming from a person of color and it is being directed against whites," D'Souza continues.

Among the race-based inquiries in the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association (JAPA) was an essay, titled "On Having Whiteness," by Dr. Donald Moss who holds faculty positions at psychoanalytic institutes in San Francisco and New York. In the confessional piece written by the white academic, Moss describes the "evils of whiteness" that he believes are almost "created in the womb and last until the grave," D'Souza explains. "Whiteness is a condition one first acquires and then one has — a malignant, parasitic-like condition to which 'white' people have a particular susceptibility," an abstract of the article on Sage Journals says.

"Parasitic Whiteness renders its hosts’ appetites voracious, insatiable, and perverse," states the paper, published on the National Library of Medicine's PubMed site. "Once established, these appetites are nearly impossible to eliminate [...] There is not yet a permanent cure," the abstract concludes.

D'Souza analyzes the situation if the demographics were switched, replacing Khilanani's purported white enemy with an individual who's homosexual. "Can you imagine the public reaction if someone did that?" D'Souza presses.

Then he swaps out "whiteness" in Moss's abstract for "blackness."

"This sounds like it's written by Hitler," remarks D'Souza after interchanging the phrasing. "What you have here is the type of rhetoric so violent, so extreme..."

D'Souza says the rhetoric is not just extreme on the part of wrongdoers who want to inflict violence, but also "rhetoric internalized by the target of that violence."

While "effective treatment consists of a combination of psychic and social-historical interventions," Moss argues there is "no guarantee against regression." Such interventions can "aim only to reshape Whiteness's infiltrated appetites—to reduce their intensity, redistribute their aims, and occasionally turn those aims toward the work of reparation," the white psychoanalyst goes on.

"You can moderate whiteness, but you can't cure it," D'Souza summarizes Moss's argument. "The true message of what he's saying is: 'Wipe me off the face of the earth.' In other words, the real message here is: 'Whiteness is an incurable plague.' And how far is it from that kind of message," D'Souza ponders, from far-left radicals disposed towards violence. "This is nothing more than an invitation to genocide." D'Souza then names Nazi leader Adolf Hitler's manifesto Mein Kampf.

D'Souza states that even Hitler's rhetoric in Mein Kampf "does not match the virulence" of what he's been describing throughout the podcast.

"We have reached a very interesting phase in society, in which whites, who are still the majority of our population, have somehow allowed or sanctioned or let happen," D'Souza continues, "because there are obviously whites behind this movement." He reiterates that Moss is white, most of the leaders heading America's institutions are white, and most of the college presidents who approve of the anti-white rhetoric are white.

"So they are sanctioning what can only be described as a dangerous, violent, belligerent, and borderline genocidal-type of rhetoric," D'Souza says, adding that Hitler first named the Jews, insulted the population, and utilized derogatory words like "parasites" and "leeches" to label the Jewish people.

The initial move by Hitler was to "dehumanize" the Jews and Judaism, by linking all associations to a "deformed, malignant, parasitic, animal-like condition."

"All of those elements are present in the rhetoric that I described here today," D'Souza states. "I think we are reaching a dangerous turn in our society, in which we are licensing the kind of behavior for which the 20th century, I think, will be infamous in the annals of history," he elucidates.

What makes the current situation ironic is that the present anti-white hatred is being "mobilized in the name of fighting hatred," D'Souza observes.

"But it's not fighting hatred. It is hatred. And it's carrying hatred to new unprecedented and chilling lengths," D'Souza concludes.