All Episodes
Next
Nov. 10, 2020 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
55:04
The Podcast of The Lotus Eaters #0
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to this first test run of the podcast of the Lotus Eaters.
This is the daily podcast of lotuseaters.com.
We'll be broadcasting the podcast every day live from 1pm British time, so...
A little bit earlier than we started today, which should be about 8am Eastern Standard Time, depending on daylight savings.
We'll be discussing all the latest political and cultural news that we feel should concern anyone who holds any kind of patriotic sentiment.
I think this is the real sort of...
Point of distinction from us and other podcasts.
But if you'd like to support our work, you can, of course, like, share, and subscribe.
But you can also go over to lotuseaters.com, as listed there, and become a member for as little as £5 per month to enjoy our premium content, which includes exclusive interviews, opinion pieces from influential commentators and public figures, and our monthly book club, and much more, all of which is live on the website right now.
As you might imagine, all of this is going to be something of an evolutionary process.
We'll be making improvements and additions as we go, so please bear with us.
And so, Callum.
Hey.
Hey.
What are we talking about first today?
Okay, first, because you've been speaking, well a lot of people have been speaking a lot about the proposed voter fraud within the US election.
Yes.
And there seems to be two narratives here.
The Republicans are saying, okay, it's extremely close, just like it was in 2016, well, on votes, not electoral votes.
Therefore, we think that voter fraud might have been able to swing the election, so we want an investigation into it.
And the reaction from every Democrat I'm seeing is, voter fraud doesn't exist.
Or at least it's so minimal, it's like a few people, it can't happen, this is not a problem.
Yeah, there have been many memes about this going around.
In 2016, all Russians hacked the election.
In 2020, it's impossible to hack the election.
Yeah, well, what's funny about that is it's actually kind of false.
Like, if you reread the Wikipedia page for the 2016 election, you can read the sections in which Clinton's campaign staff were asking her, look, the vote in Michigan's extremely close, you should ask for a recount.
And they were also saying the electoral systems might have some fraud in them, so it may very well be that you've won, you know, Madam President.
And she said, no, she said, I'm not going to do that.
So she didn't want to investigate it.
She doesn't want to investigate these democratic controlled areas that were really, really, really close.
Yeah, I don't know why, but that's up to her.
Really makes me think.
But yeah, so this time around, the argument is essentially that this can't happen.
Yeah.
So what I wanted to look at is let's look at a real case of voter fraud that's happened in a first-rate nation, you know, proper regulations in place, and is similar to what's going on in the U.S. at the moment.
So I found a case from 2004 in Birmingham.
So this is British elections.
We allow postal votes as well.
They've also slowly exploded since the 2000s.
And this one is really, really weird because it's a local election.
The stakes aren't exactly high compared to the US. You think of the US, there's a lot more incentive to...
Was this like Birmingham Council?
Yeah, Birmingham Council.
Who cares?
If you don't live in Birmingham, this is just not something you would think about.
Yeah.
Labour stronghold.
I'm not even sure why the Labour Party thought they had to cheat, but they did.
So what happened is...
I'll put the link of the article in the chat just so people can find it because I don't have an image of it on screen.
Sorry, we can put all of this in afterwards.
Yeah, yeah.
You know, the links afterwards.
We'll just go through it with them.
So, here's a few quotes from it.
So, this is after the investigation.
The judge is telling us the facts.
So what happened is corrupt postmen had handed over sacks of postal ballots to Labour candidates, little boys had been paid to steal postal ballots from letterboxes and bags full of postal votes had arrived at the count to be counted and included without question.
Bags of postal votes, which were clearly identifiable, were wheeled through the streets in sacks by temporary staff or carted into the count in plastic bags, dumped in the boot of a car.
Postal votes were regarded as different from personal votes and less worthy of strict control.
So what's happening here is they're literally either getting bribes from postal workers who lean labour, or they're teaching little boys to go into postal boxes and steal ballots.
Paying them, wasn't it?
Paying them, yeah.
You've got to train them as well, right?
Yeah, but...
And then just walking into the, so here's the polling place, and they're literally walking out to their car in the car park of the polling place, pulling out a Tesco's bag full of votes, walking back in and they're going, hey, I found more postal votes, please count them.
And they just did.
And no one thought this was suspicious, none of the poll workers spoke up, nothing.
Because it sounds ridiculous.
It sounds like some sort of 70s sketch, like a Monty Python thing or a carry-on film or something.
It sounds ridiculous.
But if Alex Jones had told you this had been happening in this election in 2020, you'd say, oh, shut the...
Why are you wasting our time with this nonsense?
But this really happened, and this was really...
It went through all the courts, and it's been...
They were convicted.
Three Labour councillors were convicted of voter fraud, and these are the facts of the case.
So, given the fact that it sounds ridiculous, and I don't blame anyone at the time for sounding ridiculous, the police didn't even believe it.
So, I presume the Conservatives went to the police and were like, hey, they just walked in with bags of ballots.
This doesn't seem legit.
You need to investigate this.
and the judge's words on what the police response was was "Although the police received many complaints of fraud in the run-up to the election, that attitude could be kindest, could be at the kindest be described as one of Olympian detachment.
The name they gave the investigation of the complaints, Operation Grip, indicated better than anything else in their view that the whole business was a waste of their time and the complaints were a tiresome nuisance." No, that's not Operation Grip, that's Operation Great.
Oh, Gripe, sorry.
Sorry.
But that does indicate that they do think the complaints are a tiresome nuisance, doesn't it?
Yeah, this is nonsense.
Okay, yeah, we'll investigate it because you complained.
But the investigation went forward and they found them.
They found the votes.
So there's another article here from the BBC that I just found.
The judge said that no less than 1,500 votes had been cast fraudulently in the city.
And given that a single ward could be 2,000 votes, that's a ridiculous amount.
That's swing the election massively.
But if the stakes are such for a council election, that someone's willing to manufacture...
Well, he's probably at least 20% of the votes.
Why wouldn't you do that if you think Trump is a fascist dictator who's going to overthrow the country, you know, have a third term after he's done?
You know, the stakes are much higher in the US. So I'm not trying to claim that it's...
I don't think it's possible for Biden or his staff to directly do this.
I don't think there's...
It has to be done on a local level.
Yeah, it's done by local people who think they can get away with it.
They probably can.
And the problem here was the massive jump in postal votes.
And the fact that the postal votes aren't really treated the same in strictness.
And they brought in in sacks, apparently.
Yeah, I mean, they were literally just bringing them in.
No one had any questions.
At 4am, perhaps?
I don't have the time, but I can imagine, yeah.
They probably brought it in the middle of the afternoon.
Well, no, because, what is it, in the UK, counting starts at 12.
Oh, right.
At midnight.
So it probably is 4am.
Everyone's gone to bed.
Oh, here's some more votes.
The magic hour.
Yeah.
But, I mean, this...
The reason this is very worrying to me is because if this can happen at a local election with postal votes, it's bound to happen on a national situation, which is what the judge said.
The judge said, OK, we need to be prepared for next year's general election because this is going to happen again all over the country.
So the idea it wouldn't happen in the US is nonsense.
Yeah.
But in the UK, it's not a huge percentage of postal votes.
I think I found some data that said in 2010, it had only gone up to 18% of all votes cast in the general were postal votes.
So I did some pocket calculations of the US elections.
So in 2016, there were 33 million postal votes, which means that 25% of the vote was done by post.
Yeah, it's a very large amount.
You know, America's a big nation...
But that's a large percentage.
Yeah, and if it's open to fraud...
One in four is a lot more vulnerable to fraud than having voted in person.
That's a point of serious concern.
If Miss Clinton had said, one in four of the votes is postal, I don't think they're very secure, we ought to have a recount, she'd be right to do it, you know?
Yeah.
So, guess what it is for 2020?
I can see the notes, but tell me.
Okay, so 65 million postal votes so far, and that means 44% of all votes were done by post.
So more than twice, almost twice as many votes that were cast by post in 2016 have been cast in 2020.
Yeah.
That's amazing.
I mean, this is somewhat expected because of the coronavirus, obviously.
Yeah, but double.
Double is a lot.
But what I'm more worried about there is if...
What is that?
Almost half?
You know, 6% off half of the votes are done by post.
And that we know the postal votes are easy to...
I mean, Trump and Biden got, what, 70 million votes respectively, and 65.4 million of them are postal votes.
That's staggering.
And that's the thing that has flipped it for Biden, because everyone's seen the footage, everyone's stayed up for it, but it was looking like Trump, then the poster votes started getting counted, and then all of a sudden it switched to Biden.
So, is it unreasonable for Donald Trump to claim, okay, it's very close, I'd like some recounts, and I'd also like to investigate whether or not these were all legitimate?
That's not an illegitimate thing to say.
In fact, it's a perfectly reasonable thing to say.
In fact, anyone who had that sort of Olympian detachment to the electoral process would still say, well, this is, even though I've got no dog in this fight, this is still something that is concerning.
It's a statistical anomaly, and so should be looked at.
Yeah.
I mean, especially in a close race.
I mean, if this was, I don't know, 70% of all votes were cast for Biden, landslide, 360 electoral college votes, you know, okay, this isn't going to be flipped by a handful of activists.
But when you're looking in states, there's, what are they, 12,000, 20,000?
In Nevada, the last count was 8,000.
Really razor thin margin.
4,000 magical votes at the end of the day, but flip it.
Absolutely.
Really, really important.
And notice how it's localized in these particular states as well.
Yeah, that's one of the things the judge noted on, but he didn't want to linger on, was in Birmingham, for example, the majority of these fake votes that were then found out were all coming from the Asian community in Birmingham, which was extremely strange for 2004, because the Asian community were very upset with the Labour Party for starting the war in Iraq, or at least joining the Americans in the war.
So the idea that all of a sudden they were coming out to vote for the Labour Party didn't make any sense either.
So it's communities who have...
Maybe had similar circumstances in the home countries that voting is a bit of a joke.
But anyway, let's go on to the US, because I've got a video here, but I don't think we can play it.
Which is, basically we found out that Pelosi's ex-chief of staff works for a voting company which handles the electronic voting for the US. They sell voting machines to the US and the Canadians to run their elections.
I don't understand why people do electronic voting.
It doesn't make any sense to me, but okay, whatever.
But the fact that you'd have the ex-chief of staff for Nancy Pelosi working at the company, I mean, it raises an eyebrow.
I mean, let's say this was Rudy Giuliani was their lawyer.
You'd have some questions.
You'd say, okay, well, we're not saying you've done anything wrong, but we're a little bit suspicious.
If it was someone from the Trump campaign, all the media would be doing is screaming this is a fix.
Yeah.
If this was just flipped to the other side, it would be a total fix, totally illegitimate.
The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal would all have articles saying about how the US is turning into a Timpok banana republic and Trump as a dictator, which they've been saying anyway.
But as soon as it's done by Pelosi and her people, zip!
Nothing to say.
Perfectly bipartisan.
They would have taken all the precautions.
He's a professional.
We trust these people.
I'm sorry.
That's not the case.
The last thing I've got here is just the postal vote growth.
I'll put the link in the chat again just so people can see it.
It's the data for the UK. So this is a conservative website in the UK basically questioning what are we going to do about postal votes because it's exploding.
So from 1945 till about 1997, the rate of postal votes, the percentage of total votes that are from post, hovers around 2%.
It's not a big issue.
This is like with the US, you know, a lot of Democrats are saying, oh, it's fine, we've always had postal voting, you know, since the Civil War.
Yeah.
Technically.
What percentage?
Yeah.
Because 2% of postal votes...
There's nothing, yeah.
It's not even that important, to be honest.
But since 1997 to 2010, when they had this data in the UK, they exploded from 2% to 18%.
So almost 20%.
A fifth of the election now relies on the post.
And in the United States now, 44%.
Yeah.
That's staggering.
It seems to just be opening up our elections to fraud.
Because that's the thing, not everyone does postal voting.
Like, people seem to forget, like, oh, we've always had it, therefore it's round, therefore it's safe.
Well, not necessarily.
But then the fact that, you know, there's a lot of countries in Europe that don't do postal voting exactly for this reason.
Yeah.
So, yeah, don't say it can't be done.
It can be done.
Yeah, and there was some data that came back from concerned activists on Twitter.
John, I don't know whether you can get these images up now.
Number one...
So the first one, this chap at VC4351, had been going through the Pennsylvania data.
This is the data that they got from the government website.
They found that a bunch of the mail-in ballots were returned before they were mailed.
And so those ballots that they found that had been returned before they'd even been sent out, they marked in red as suspicious, and found that they'd received over 109,000 of them.
Those are people saying, I'd like a postal vote, please.
Yes.
And they're like, okay, let's send you one.
But before they even send one out, they've received one from you.
That's correct.
With your vote.
109,000 of these, which is about 3.5% in Pennsylvania alone.
But again, with margins this razor thin...
What is Pennsylvania's percentage?
It's got to be like 1% or something like that.
Yeah, it's really small.
Pennsylvania being one of the battleground states.
And if you can put up the next one, John...
They say they've distributed it in a graph.
So the total mail-ins, you can see that there's this anomalous peak that they've mentioned.
But you can see the new suspicious and then the after effect of it.
You can see there's this weird peak for mail-in ballots that comes in just before and just after the thing's been sent.
And then if you compare that then with other statistics regarding Joe Biden's voting, the votes received, then it again just starts building up this picture of things that are really suspicious.
For example, Biden had record low enthusiasm and underperformed across major cities compared to 2016.
And you can see in New York City, he's 200,000 votes down.
In Chicago, he's 200,000 votes down.
In Miami, 7,000 votes down.
But at 4 a.m.
in Atlanta destroyed Milwaukee and Pittsburgh, he's suddenly up tens of thousands of votes.
76,000, 67,000, 28,000, 29,000.
And again, Democrat-controlled cities in heavily contested states.
So these would be the locus.
And you can see these plotted out on the graph where Joe Biden has just got strange numbers coming in when he shouldn't do.
So, basically, I think that there is more than enough evidence that we've just shown here now to suggest that this happens.
It is something that's open to corruption.
It's rising to an extraordinary proportion in the United States.
I mean, 18% is high enough here, but 44% there is incredible.
And the numbers for Biden just don't add up.
And this is all just the statistics of the data that we have on the official websites.
This is to say nothing of the fact that Joe Biden couldn't get people to attend his rallies, whereas Trump was packing them out by the tens of thousands.
I mean, just to be short, this isn't necessarily evidence, therefore it's flipped.
It's saying, look, the margins are so close that when you've got this many red flags, there ought to be an investigation.
Yeah, it's evidence that suggests that there has been at least a cause for concern.
It's not concrete proof that this has happened, but it's evidence that would suggest that there could be tampering and therefore an investigation is warranted.
Just like the Conservatives in Birmingham, who saw them walking in with ballots.
And then the turnout in a couple of the wards had jumped to 300% or 150% with the two statistics from the court case.
I go, hey, come on.
Like, there's something to miss here.
Yep.
Yeah, don't let people tell you this definitely can't happen or postal voting fraud is not a thing.
Oh, it's only five people a year or something like that.
No.
The only problem with this is finding the postal votes that are fraudulent.
Because especially with the US with the different rules and different states, I believe some of them don't even have to be stamped or signed or some nonsense.
So actually going through it and trying to find which ones are fraudulent You know, good luck.
I guess we'll cover it when we get more information about it.
Yeah.
So, moving on to the one I wanted to talk about most, and this is one that I think is a lot more important than people realize, is would Joe Biden restore critical race theory?
Because obviously this comes from the end of September.
Trump issued an executive order saying he's going to ban the teaching of critical race theory not only in the federal government, but also he's going to withdraw contracts from private companies that teach critical race theory that have contracts with the federal government.
This was an amazing feat.
When you put it into the framing of the sort of battle of ideas, you know, whose moral structure should be put forward, because critical race theory has a lot of presuppositions built into it that are, frankly, antithetical to the liberal ideal of judging people by the content of their character, rather than the colour of their skin.
Critical race theory, as you might, well, take from the title of it, is entirely based on racial judgments.
And so Trump ended it.
He said this.
I ended it because it's racist.
I ended it because a lot of people were complaining that they were asked to do things that were absolutely insane.
That it was a radical revolution that was taking place in our military, in our schools, all over the place.
We were paying people hundreds of thousands of dollars to teach very bad ideas and frankly very sick ideas.
And really they were teaching people to hate our country and I'm not going to allow that to happen.
Now I've spent quite a lot of time studying critical race theory because it seems that this is the ideological lens that is the source of what we can call wokeness, and I think Trump did exactly the right thing there.
The Department of Labor weighed in saying that the elimination of race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating in employment was a key civil rights priority of the Trump administration, and that they were going to root out ideologies that label entire groups of Americans as inherently racist or evil in diversity training materials by searching and that they were going to root out ideologies that label entire groups of Americans as inherently racist or evil in Completely correct.
This is exactly the right thing to do.
Because critical race theory is predicated on the idea of raising racial consciousness among a certain racial group.
Now, raising racial consciousness was precisely what, and I hate to go Godwin's Law here, but it's exactly what the Nazis did.
The very purpose was for every individual German to view themselves as A political actor, a political agent, because of their race.
So, in all times and all places, the political German has become something that exerts power on other racial groups.
And it's the same thing for critical race theory.
The politically black person exerts power against the white supremacy.
And this means that all of liberal democracy has to be recast in a racial mold.
So liberal democracy itself is now not merely a set of ideas that happen to produce good results for individual citizens.
Now this is an expression of the white racial consciousness, and basically it's a framework that is designed to exclude non-white people.
I've got many, many criticisms of this line of thinking, obviously.
I don't subscribe to this at all.
And you can check out my Conservatives' Guide to White Fragility on the website.
Premium content if you'd like to know more.
But the question was, is Joe Biden, is his administration likely to overturn?
This executive order, and it seems that it is likely that he will.
USA Today reported that a Joe Biden administration would likely scrap an executive order from the Trump administration that restricts the federal government and its contractors from offering diversity training that Trump labeled divisive and un-American.
Trump's executive order gets rid of it all, blah blah blah.
One Frank Turner, a partner with law firm McCarter& English, who represents the multinational contractors and small and medium-sized companies, told USA Today that he thinks it's highly probable that this executive order will be rescinded in fairly short order.
And we have a quote from Joe Biden's Latino Agenda Manifesto.
So he has racial manifestos and racial agendas on his website, which I think is the sort of thing the Nazis would have done.
Again, I hate to bring it up, but it's...
It just runs totally antithetical to how I think all of our countries should be run.
But in it he said he will also reissue and mandate strict compliance with the Obama-Biden executive order to promote diversity and inclusion in the federal government.
And as you can tell by the words diversity and inclusion, they are ideological words.
They are sort of shibboleths that the activists can use to identify that they are on the same team.
If you say, well, I'm very much in favor of diversity and inclusion, they will be expecting you to...
It's a dog whistle.
It's a dog whistle.
It's not even just a dog whistle, though.
They use them in a way that they consider to be legitimate.
For them, it describes something that is definable.
And anyway, presumably this would supplant Trump's proposed patriotic education that won't teach people to hate their own countries.
And this, frankly, is bad news if Biden does turn out to win.
For anyone who at least isn't a racist.
The racists will be thrilled.
This is exactly the kind of reason, this is exactly the kind of policy I imagine, that people like Richard Spencer actually voted for Joe Biden to enact.
Because raising racial consciousness was core of the alt-rights message, which is one of the reasons I was so opposed to them.
And one of the reasons they hated me so much, because I'm an individualist.
And raising racial consciousness is explicit collectivism.
So the only people who benefit from this are the racists.
I wonder though, do you reckon Joe Biden has thought this through himself, or is it just the activists have written this for him?
I don't suspect for a second that Joe Biden really understands any of these things.
I think that Joe Biden has, throughout the course of his life, been an intellectual grifter, where he's just been ripping off other people from various other countries and other people's speeches, and he's lied about his own educational achievements.
I think that he's just a fraud.
I don't know, I mean...
I wonder, because there's been a screenshot put out of like, oh, the first things I'll do in my days of administration.
I don't know how genuine it is.
But the wording they used there was he wanted to rescind Trump's ban on diversity training within the federal government.
I can imagine him saying that.
You know, oh, we should have diversity training.
It's a good thing.
You know, that kind of nonsense.
But he would never speak in the terms of critical race theory or saying he wants, what is it, the manifesto here, to ensure political appointees, including the president's cabinet, Would be diversity high, ensuring racial diversity among clerks, staffers, and interns.
So he's going to have a lot of racial affirmative action policies.
He's going to bring back critical race training, and he personally probably doesn't understand anything of the philosophy behind it and the way that it's framed.
But he's going to hand it off to a bunch of academic activists who are going to be trained Marxists in the Quotes of the Black Lives Matter founders, and they'll be allowed to indoctrinate people across all of these systems, and it'll go as far as they can push it.
The only thing that will stop them is just where they've run out of money.
I mean, this is happening in the UK for what?
I think Tony Blair brought this in initially, so it's been like 20 years.
Well, the discipline seems to have been evolving quite rapidly.
Oh, I just mean when you start applying it through the national government.
Yeah.
I believe it was him who, well, I think Peter Hitchens talked about this, where it was him who first introduced that everyone working for the national government in the UK had to sign up for promoting, I think it was diversity and inclusion or diversity and equality or something.
Garbled word.
And that was essentially the first instigation of this sort of thing in the UK. And it's been going for 20 years, and it's not good.
Like, this doesn't produce any good results.
No, it's been going for longer than that.
It was in the 60s and 70s that this first came out of critical legal scholarship in the United States.
This has been a genuinely long march that they have gone through through these institutions.
The Critical Race Theory came out of that.
By the 90s, by the late 90s, it probably was, in roughly the form that we recognize it now, it probably had the basic outline.
But there's been an awful lot of evolution in its own sort of wheelhouse to get their own, get all their ducks in order, get everything to be interlocked and say, no, everything's a white supremacy, black people are oppressed, you know, all of these things are aspects of the white racial conscious.
The nailing down of the hierarchy, that white women, eh, not really part of us.
And the rhetoric as well.
Yeah, of course.
But the rhetoric as well, and the angles of attack against what we could describe as normal discourse.
Because what this is all predicated on is the idea that they have the ability to change the definition of the words that we're using.
Because if they would say, oh, well, you're a racist, what they mean is that racism is a system of structural inequalities and oppressions, That are going to be holding black people, brown people down forever.
It's like, okay, but that's not what I believe.
You know what?
I mean, you can't really accuse an individual of being a system.
You know, it doesn't make any sense.
So if we allow them to redefine racist, then calling someone racist is no longer an insult.
They would have to just call you prejudiced or something like this.
But they don't care, because it's all about power.
No, but they don't care.
It's Mott and Bailey.
We'll use your definition of racist when I'm accusing you of hating black people, but we'll use my definition of racist when we're talking about whether we live in a fair and just society.
And so it's...
Completely, completely backwards.
But yeah, it seems that we have ample evidence to suggest that Joe Biden will indeed reinstate critical race theory.
So let's hope those recounts happen.
God.
You can look forward to, what was it, the Wism Leaks from, I think it was the RAF, of what they were teaching the RAF to do.
So they can look forward to people in the U.S. military calling each other Zerzer.
We have an article about that, do we not?
Yeah, we do.
I don't think it's premium, actually.
It's free.
I think it is.
Free article on LotusEats.com about the woke-ification of the British military.
All right, okay, do you want to go through?
Subjects.
Yeah, not really sure to make this because I don't think anyone's really sure what to make of it.
But because it's looking like a Joe Biden victory, Boris has come out and congratulations, Mr.
President-elect, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Can we do that trade deal, by the way?
Because, yeah, so Donald Trump's been extremely supportive for the last four years.
Yeah, so what's the status of Brexit at the moment?
Because this is why this applies to Britain, why this is relevant to us.
So what do we have?
We have until January the 1st to do the one with the EU. So a trade deal with the EU, which apparently they're renegotiating more today.
After accepting that Joe Biden's probably going to win, they send people back.
And what was Boris's words on this?
That there were still significant differences remain within the EU-UK trade deal.
So they're not really sure whether they're going to get one, is what I'm getting from that.
Which means probably not.
But the backup for that was always, oh, well, Donald Trump loves us.
He's very keen to do a trade deal.
We'll provide more military support, and in return we get free of trade with them.
Therefore, we don't really need the EU that much because they're our first biggest partner by country, second by bloc.
But that doesn't look so good now.
So the EU is probably going to feel pretty stoked about this and want to impose harsher terms on the UK because they probably can now.
We seem to have been put significantly on the back foot.
We've even got some examples of how Biden doesn't really seem to like Britain very much, does he?
No.
I mean, he's not keen on Britain or Brexit, really.
Neither was his predecessor, Obama.
The most famous thing with Obama is, didn't he take out the bust of Winston Churchill from the White House?
I believe he did, yeah.
And I believe that Donald Trump put it back, didn't he?
Yeah.
Didn't you think that his argument was it was racist or something like that?
Presumably.
Presumably, but Donald Trump put it back because it's a significant narrative event in the heroic story of the West.
It signifies allyship and struggle against communism, well, fascism.
That's the special relationship right there, isn't it?
That is.
That is the understanding that there is a basis of a common political ideal.
Yeah.
Because, I mean, the relationship before the Second World War, I mean, it was cordial, but the US was still writing plans about how to invade the British Empire.
I mean, we had burned down their White House at one point.
Yeah, 100 years before.
But after World War II, it's been as close as you can get.
Absolutely.
But yeah, so Barack Obama was also not great on this because he was flown out to the UK. I think it was for an official visit.
And then my understanding is David Cameron met with him and David Cameron, wanting us to remain, basically slipped a fiver or something and said to him, you need to back us on this.
So he came out and gave the statement that the UK would not be at the front of the queue for a trade deal.
They'd be at the back of the queue to try and discourage us from voting.
Turns out no one cares about Obama's opinion on that.
Yeah, but I don't know whether or not he held that sincerely or it was just a favour to what he thought would be the Prime Minister anyway.
But it's not a good signal.
But Joe Biden being his VP, we can probably take that as...
It's probably going to be...
Significance thinking about Brexit.
Yeah, a continuation.
But the thing is, it's not just that that I think is significant in his thinking.
No, there's a lot more with Joe himself.
Well, do you want to go into some of it?
Yeah, so the first thing that news came out today was that Joe Biden's staff had spoken to some news agencies and said that the UK-US trade deal is not a priority for him.
So...
Not keen, or at least not showing he's interested in us, which sends a signal that, oh, crap, though.
It was nice when Trump was in charge and we were at the front of the queue.
Yep, yep, it was.
And there's also this bit where his staff had also spoken to The Guardian, and they said that Biden regarded Brexit as a significant mistake.
After a Biden victory and a failure to reach a trade deal with the EU, the UK would occupy a lonely place in the world.
That's a direct quote from Biden there.
We call it splendid isolation, Biden.
Yeah.
That's what we call it.
Yeah, I don't think he understands that.
There's also something that happened two days ago now that I found really interesting.
Joe Biden was on his way out of a meeting room or whatever, and he's surrounded by the press.
And someone from the BBC was there trying to get his attention, and he was like, where are you from?
And they said, the BBC. And he just looks at them and smiles and says, I'm Irish, and then walks off.
And I was quite shocked.
I mean, that kind of implies a kind of long-standing ethnic hatred that he feels that the Irish maybe have against the British and that he, being of Irish descent, has to hold up.
I mean, and it seems to be a kind of similar position to one taken by the IRA. Like, a genuine sort of racist view.
Genuine bigotry.
Oh, you're the British Broadcasting Corporation?
Sorry, I'm Irish.
The problem with that, though, is he's so senile.
I don't even know if he's cracking a joke or not, because you can see him smiling.
And some people have said, oh, no, he was making a joke.
He was just saying, oh, you know, I'm Irish, you know, mess with you guys.
That's not convincing.
And it's not like the BBC can be considered to be a patriotic British establishment these days, an institution.
They'll probably go, yeah, we hate Britain too.
Solidarity, Conrad.
But it's worse than that.
I mean, these photos have been around forever, but they're obviously making more light now.
Him with Jerry Adams holding hands.
I don't know if you've seen that one.
I haven't seen that one, but I'm not surprised.
I'll have seen it afterwards.
I believe he's trying to make an appearance with the Good Friday Agreement.
And Nancy Pelosi and him have both...
Kamala, actually, as well.
Or is it Kamala?
Kamala.
It should kill me if I say it wrong.
But all three of them have come out and said any messing with the Good Friday Agreement would be meaning that a trade deal with the US would be off the table.
And we're not planning on messing with the Good Friday Agreement at all.
So why need to threaten us with this other than taking a stance that you're doing the wrong thing here?
You need to abandon Brexit or at least you should not have done this.
So the Democrat entire party doesn't seem to be in favour of us.
And I don't know if this is down to some kind of democratic caucus That's of Irish people in the Democratic Party or something.
Like, I'm imagining they vote Democrat.
You know, plastic paddies that aren't really Irish, but just say they're Irish.
No, there are probably a lot of Catholics who don't vote Democrat.
I don't know the percentages.
Yeah, we'd have to go and investigate that.
But the thing I felt was...
But not a friend.
No, not a friend.
It's been sad watching the Conservatives come to this realisation.
You know, Boris put out a statement saying, congratulations, Joe Biden.
Boris, calm down, it's not over yet.
And so did Dominic Raab.
In fact, I felt kind of bad for Raab, actually.
He reported by City AM that he said the US has no greater ally or dependable friend than the UK as Downing Street prepares for Joe Biden.
He was excited to work with Biden and confident the UK would be able to smooth any fears he might have about the Good Friday Agreement and how it relates to Brexit.
It's like...
That's convincing.
Yes.
Not convincing.
And he's clearly hedging.
Oh no, no, don't be silly.
We always hated Trump.
We were always expecting a Biden victory.
We're so glad you're in charge because we're going to work with you.
This started happening like seven days ago or something as well.
Yeah, literally the second the media was calling.
I think it was Savit Javid put an article or I retweeted someone who put an article saying that Joe Biden would be a great partner for the UK and we ought to support him and blah blah blah.
Savit Javid used to be the Chancellor.
He got kicked out by Boris for someone else.
Chancellor of the Exchequer, yeah.
Yeah, and then all of a sudden Boris put out a memo to all the ministers saying form ties with the Biden administration because we expect them to win, which is probably a prudent thing to do.
I mean, if...
They were looking at the mail-in balloting and thinking, Christ, some of them have already come in and they haven't been sent yet.
I don't know.
They've got the early results, you know?
Yeah, yeah, exactly, yeah.
But, you know, if there's an election, you probably should form ties for both sides for the interests of Britain over party politics.
But it seems to be, like...
They're understanding that they've now lost that tie with Trump, especially now, and they've got no one but themselves to blame.
You have four years from Brexit's start date to this election which they put in Joe Biden of pure Trump.
You could have had a great deal with him at any point, I imagine, four years, and instead they spent it wasting about, do we really want to do Brexit?
Should we have a couple of generals and then we'll figure out what we want to do?
Fine.
Your fault.
Your fault.
There's no one else to blame here.
You can't blame the Labour Party.
You can't blame any US administration.
No.
Yes, another example of the Conservative Party disappointing the Brexiteers.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I don't think this is going to be the last.
No, it's not.
So, right.
So, I figured that we should probably talk about the site somewhat.
Yeah.
Because it's up.
It's all live.
You can go to lotusseaters.com.
Right now and go and check out stuff that we have.
We've got many articles that have been lovingly crafted by Hugo.
They're very good.
We've also got some premium content already up there.
And if it's not up there yet, it will be up there by the end of today.
So, can you get up the premium image just so people can see what we're talking about?
The tier system.
Yes, we have three tiers.
This is not yet finalized.
In fact, it's going to change quite dramatically, because as we have at the moment, silver is going to become bronze, gold is going to become silver, and then gold itself will include everything as well as some stuff that we're going to add.
So at the moment, if you are to join, you will get to be able to comment on the articles, you will be able to access all of the premium content, And you'll be able to have a thing that tracks the articles you've read and marks the articles you've read as read, so just quality of life stuff there.
If you go to Silver, you'll get all of that, as well as the ability to upload video questions to our podcasts and live streams, because what we're going to do is just sort of take calling questions, you know, just as if this was like a radio show.
Basically, you can record a thing on your iPhone, be like, hey, why is the world flat?
And we'll be like, well...
Because God made it that way.
And then you can send that in to us and we'll answer your questions to the best of our ability.
Hopefully we'll be able to do a couple of those after we've gone through in the format that we've just gone through here.
And with the gold ones we'll try, I'm going to say weekly, but it might have to be fortnightly or something.
I don't know what the schedule will be.
But we'll do regular sort of Zoom chats with people who are on the gold tier membership.
So you'll be able to just join us and probably like on a Friday afternoon or something And talk to us about the things that are going on, basically.
Just have a nice chat with us.
We will also have other things that we're going to add to those, but I thought that it would probably be best, initially, if we kind of under-promised and over-delivered, rather than over-promised and under-delivered.
So, basically, as the site hopefully grows and we can sort of settle into it, we'll be able to add more tiers, silver and gold, as we go along.
You mean more things to the tiers?
Yeah, more things to the tiers.
Not more tiers, no, no.
More things to the tiers.
The content that you get access to, I think, is excellent.
So we've been getting the premium analysis pieces from respectable public figures.
At the moment, we've got Helen Dale, who writes for The Spectator, Quillette and The Australian, discussing why our COVID response was ineffective.
And we have one by Hannah Gall, who's a journalist from the Times of Israel, the Jerusalem Post, and The Spectator, discussing Jordan Peterson's return and why it's important.
I don't want to spoil any of them now, but they're really good.
I'd just like to also thank James for the sign, patch, and panel.
These are amazing.
They're absolutely wonderful.
Thank you so much for sending them across.
I'm really, really happy with those.
We've got also the first book club instalment on the website as well, which is me talking about Orwell's Notes on Nationalism.
This is a book club book I've been planning to do for ages because Orwell has, he slightly redefines nationalism.
Because there's a literal reading of nationalism, which is purely you care about a nation-state, and this is the heart of your political activism, and it's about desiring power for this abstract entity that is the nation-state.
But that, because of the abstract nature of it, could actually be applied to other things rather than just nationalism.
And, in fact, he describes nationalism as a kind of abstract power hunger rather than what we could describe as patriotism.
But I won't go into it.
I'll let you find the book club stuff on the premium guide to the site.
We've also got my speech to the German parliament about white fragility, and we will have much more there soon.
Right, is there anything I forgot?
Anything else?
Because normally we'd have questions and stuff, but this is...
Superchats.
Yeah, and the first test thing.
What are we going to do with Superchats?
I guess we'll take them.
We'll take them on the channel and then just read them out at the end like normal.
Or do it via PayPal when we get deplatformed.
Yeah, you know, however we can do it.
But the point of the video messaging was, like, because it's for patrons and members, then it's kind of like a prepaid super chat.
So basically, you know, you've paid to get access to all the content and comment on the site and all this sort of stuff.
But it's a way that you can send us questions.
And I think it'll be fun, you know, it'll be...
It'd be fun to do, wouldn't it?
You never know what kind of people...
Get some interesting stuff!
Yeah, exactly!
Record us a 10-15 second video clip and send it across.
But is there anything else that we should tell people?
I don't think so.
Check out the site.
Yeah, check out the site.
It's really good.
We work really hard and we're all really happy with it.
Any bugs are not my fault.
It's very much an evolutionary project.
If there are any problems, they'll be fixed.
Give us some time.
But also, let us know.
I can see someone already saying they tried to sign up and they got a 404.
There will definitely be bugs.
Do us a favour.
Is it contact at lotusseaters.com for the email?
I'm not sure which one Ken issues that up.
I think it is contact, yeah.
I think it is contact at lotuseaters.com.
Yeah, if you find any problems or any bugs or you have any issues, email us at contact at lotuseaters.com and we will receive that and thank you very much for letting us know where the problems are.
We'll get them fixed as soon as we can.
Should they send tips to that address as well?
There's actually a different email address for that.
It's tips at lotuseaters.com.
Inventive.
Well, you want to keep it simple.
If you are someone who has something that you think that we should know, then feel free to send us an email to tips at lotuseaters.com.
One of the things that people did for us before we started this is email the Yeah, so the Facebook page used to be great for this stuff.
Please take high quality photos if you're going to do this.
But take pictures of them being taught critical race theory in government departments or in major corporations or just any of this nonsense.
And they'd send it on to us and we'd make sure to take off the names so we can't identify you.
And then just publish it so people can know.
Yes, this company is giving $2 million to Black Lives Matter this year.
I mean, that's one of the companies.
What was it?
The third largest producer of weapons gave $2 million to Black Lives Matter last year.
It's very progressive.
Yeah.
We bomb brown kids all day and then we send money to brown kids.
It's like...
I don't think you're making up for it, but okay.
So send that sort of stuff to the tips.
Articles that we may have missed.
So people used to send some really good stuff.
So if we had no idea something was going on in the US or New Zealand or Australia, we're not there.
So that would be the place to send it.
And you'll be able to find all of the...
These are the sort of things that will go into our free, obviously publicly available news articles.
You can find all the stuff that Callum's been talking about already on the website.
So that's good.
So that information is all out there.
Feel free to use it.
We want people to know that, frankly, racism is being taught as a matter of state policy and as a matter of company policy and all of these companies.
People should know.
Yeah.
I mean, people should be embarrassed to promote this within their companies.
I mean, the state one's harder, because that's something you have to get MPs to abolish, which...
Not with the current Conservative Party.
That's not going to happen.
No.
Well, there's only 40...
The Conservative Party in Britain had to undergo mandatory critical race diversity training, and only 40 of them out of something like 200...
How many Conservative MPs are there?
No.
That's 300, I think.
That's 300, yeah.
And only 40 of them objected to having to do this?
That's disgraceful.
Weak.
What the hell's wrong with them?
Why are any of them subjected to it?
We want to give you this...
Boris wasn't one of them, I don't think.
No.
So...
We want to give you this racist training.
No.
Do we have time for another topic?
Yeah, go for it.
So, this is one of the interesting things.
We've cut some of the stuff of...
So, the Equalities Minister for the Conservatives.
Basest woman alive, in my view.
So, she's from...
I can't remember which African country, but West Africa.
Let me pull up your article about it.
Yeah, so she came out and just said, no, critical race theory is an evil racist ideology, and we're not going to be, you know, we don't endorse it, we don't think it should be taught, all the rest of it.
Now, I don't know what action she's taken.
I think just within the Equalities Department it's now banned.
I don't think in the education or in the Parliament in general.
But that's one of the things I find really strange, is the Equalities Minister comes out, says all the right things, perfectly gets it.
You know, this is someone in the Cabinet.
And yet, on a mass governmental level, the Conservative Party...
Don't even seem to know, or at least don't signal that there's a problem or that they're going to do anything about it.
Well, Pete Hitchens always complains that the Conservative Party is essentially without ideology.
He always complains about this, because this leaves them kind of rudderless and unable to properly articulate why they object to things.
That's a great way of putting it.
Yeah, and no, no, it is a great way of putting it.
I've been hanging out with them, so I met with conservative activists, conservative counsellors and things, and you go out with them, and I remember having a couple of conversations about ideology, actually.
So I said, you consider yourself a liberal, classical liberal, conservative, you know, are you a bit of a social liberal?
Nothing.
Nothing from...
Just blank stairs.
Yeah, the continual response I got from most of them, you know, there are some in there who absolutely get it.
I mean, the candidate we were canvassing for absolutely got it.
But most of them had the opinion that not really important at all.
What's important is when I'm in the seat, just do what works.
You know, do what works here.
You know, in the terms of monetary issues, so, you know, buses or things like this.
But if you don't have an ideological viewpoint in which to approach these things, Like, yeah, don't let it overshadow what's true.
Of course, yeah.
Don't be a zealot.
Yeah, but also don't let the opposition just run away with nonsense and have no way of countering it.
Like, you need to know how to counter the stuff.
Well, that's the thing.
I mean, like, the Black Lives Matter founder said that they're heavily trained in ideology.
And then Marxism.
They do this for a reason, because this is about subversion.
And if you don't know what to look out for ideologically, then you'll be using all of the opponent's language.
You're open to attack.
You're totally open, yeah, exactly.
And the very framing in the language, I mean, one of the things we've got to start trying to reject is their language.
I hear people that I know, and who are much further right-wing than I am, But they still use terms like, oh, we're the neo-reactionaries.
Who made that word up?
That was made up by left-wingers.
The word reactionary.
Yeah, the use of the word reactionary as a political label is made up by the radical left-wingers to describe traditionalist forces.
And so the people on the right should be saying, well, we're traditionalists.
We're interested in hearth and home and patriotism and the good things about the country that we've inherited.
No, you're a reactionary.
It sounds bad, because it's deliberate.
And yet the conservatives, or not even the conservatives, sorry, these people are much further right than the conservatives, who are still approaching it with the left's language.
And it's like, no, you have essentially just stepped into a trap.
And you're waiting for it to close now.
You know, you can't escape now.
You've accepted that their definitions are correct about you, so why should their definitions about other things be wrong?
And we shouldn't give any validity to any of them.
So that's what the problem is here, that you might have, say, the Conservative minister who absolutely gets it.
She's clearly...
You know, understands what she believes and why she believes it.
But the rest of the ministers, or a majority, just don't, which means that when it comes to a national policy on these kind of things, they have no idea what they're doing.
Well, it's not just that.
I mean, that's true.
But also, they won't realise why what they're being asked to do is bad.
You know, if they've got no way of...
I mean, if they're just like, well, I just want what works.
Well, you know, what does works mean in this context?
You know, if it gets left-wing activists off your back, yeah, this will work.
You know, if you just do everything they say, they'll stop telling you you're racist.
That's true.
But what will it do?
You know, there will be other consequences from this.
And you're talking about...
The sort of tenor of the civilization in which you live, it becomes racialized.
It becomes power politics focused.
Because all of critical race theory, the legitimating factor is power.
It's not anything else.
It's not moral decency.
It's not goodness.
It's not virtue.
It's not even the results.
It's not even the consequences.
It's all about who has the authority to act.
It doesn't even matter if it gets the goals that they want, as long as they're the ones in the seat.
Look at the state of the communities that they claim to care about.
Yeah, that's true.
Look at the state of them.
That's true.
They...
Well, you know, they're all equally poor.
Well, there, I guess we've brought about equality.
All we have to do is make sure the other ones who vote conservative, which demographics they're in Britain, Hindus, the Sikhs, and the Jews in Britain, vote conservative overwhelmingly.
Those guys are going to have to watch out, because the identity politicians are going to be looking at them going, you're not allowed to do that.
Succeed.
Be free.
Vote for the right wing.
You're not allowed to do that.
Like you were saying about the woman, I got the quote up.
Go and read this and watch the video.
It's totally worth your time.
It's fantastic.
The video is embedded in the article on the website.
She says, it promotes divisive or victim narratives that are harmful to British society.
It is a publicly stated desire to abolish or overthrow democracy, capitalism, or to end free and fair elections.
Well, it seems there's a lot of Concern about the free and fair elections going on right now.
The use or endorsement of racist, including anti-Semitic language or communications, and a failure to condemn illegal activities done in their name or in support of their cause, particularly violent actions against people and property.
That just, I mean, salutes.
That was exactly correct.
What was her name, sorry?
Oh, it's hard to pronounce.
Sorry, but I'm English and it's a foreign name.
Yeah.
Kemi Badenoch?
Badenoch?
Just say Kemi.
Kemi.
Kemi's a good name.
But Kemi Badenoch, that sounds a bit Scottish, doesn't it?
Yeah.
But, yes, she unequivocally announced it.
She's one of the people in that gets it, you know?
Totally.
She totally gets it.
And it's at least good that there are some people in the Conservatives like that, but if the conscientious objectors to critical race theory being the 40-odd that objected are any indication that they're a very small fraction, really, of the Conservative Party, and that's scary, isn't it?
Actually, there's a friend of ours who helped us out recently, who his friends went to school with a guy who's now an MP with the Conservatives, who was one of the ones who won his seat in the last election.
And he's told me about the conversations he's had with him, and apparently he's very, very black-pilled about the party, because he's just like, God damn, they're all cucks.
They're all...
He's endlessly just ranting and raving about the fact, like, you know, I'm standing up to this and no one else is backing me, and when I talk to them about it, they just blank slate.
I don't want to talk about that.
I want to talk about the economy.
Yeah, I want to talk about tax policy.
It's like, oh...
Right, where's this country going to be in 20 years if we just talk about tax policy?
Well, we're going to be taxed through the roof.
Because whenever we talk about tax policy, it's Labour's tax policy.
How can we raise it and redistribute the money to these poor deserving communities?
That's actually one of the great quotes from Kemi there, where she just said, they're like, oh, you're not implementing correct diversity and inclusion policy.
And she just turns around and goes, no, we're just implementing ours.
You just want us to implement yours, and we're not doing that.
Win an election.
Bravo!
That's a great quote!
That's exactly right!
But that's the point, isn't it?
The assumption is made that the left wing has the correct answers, and the Conservatives are being slowly dragged towards it.
This is like Robert Conquest's second law of politics.
Any institution that is not explicitly anti-left-wing will drift leftwards over time because of the assumption that the left has essentially the correct agenda for the current political paradigm.
And without any kind of ideology or any kind of ideological, sort of positive ideological view, How can the Conservatives ever resist that?
No wonder they're being dragged further and further to the left.
Because it's all framed as if it's a moral good.
Everything the left has ever done is a moral good and everything the right has ever done has been evil.
Because human beings are one dimensional and they need to be given prosperity by the state.
We should probably wrap it up because it's getting to an hour.
I'm liking this conversation.
Yeah, me too.
We've got to get used to the time.
Are we going to have a one hour limit?
No, we won't.
I'd like to do at least two or three questions a day for people.
Hopefully you guys can send us two or three questions a day.
Or any super chats or whatever way we've got.
So we're just kind of filling the time by just talking about these things now.
Alright, should we end it?
We can do.
51 minutes.
Okay, well, guys in the chat, post a comment on the video.
Let me know how you felt the podcast was.
Let us know what you think of the studio, the conversation, the detail in the articles and your commentary on the website.
We want to hear about all of it because, as I said at the beginning, all of this is going to be very new for us to do something like this.
It's going to be very evolutionary.
We're going to hopefully just keep going until we get it right.
▲
Export Selection