Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 10, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:33:28

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #65

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.
	Welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for Wednesday the 10th of February 2021.
	I'm joined by Callum, but before we begin, I'd like to let you know that we have a Gab account.
	I think our Gab account needs some love.
	We've only got two and a half thousand followers on Gab, which is not nearly enough.
	We've got loads more followers on Facebook.
	We've got like 15,000 followers on Facebook.
	And all of our social media accounts are run by the very handsome and debonair Ranveer that you don't get to see because he's working behind the scenes.
	But go and show him some love on Gab for us, because, you know, he's just not getting enough attention there, and I don't think that's acceptable.
	We also have a Reddit subreddit.
	If you use Reddit, I don't know why I've decided that we should give this shout-out as well.
	Of course, run by Ranvir.
	But that's only got 278 members, so come on, that's not on.
	WallStreetBets is creaming us.
	Yeah, exactly.
	And on loadseeders.com, we published an article, a premium article by Michael Rectonwald yesterday.
	It seems to be very well received.
	Here's one comment from Carl Walker.
	Great article.
	It's staggering to me how many people have been warning of what's coming for years.
	Peterson comes to mind, and yet we continue down this terrible path.
	The most austere realisation I have made since the lockdown started is how anyone who supports what is going on is no longer able to castigate the Nazis because they have demonstrated that had they been in World War II Germany, they too would have been a Nazi.
	It's a really, really great advert for that article, I think.
	Really worth your time, and you can view our premium content by signing up to LotusEaters.com and becoming a member.
	You can also leave comments on the articles, comments from members only, and this means that what we're doing is we're privileging, dare I say this word, the comments on LotusEaters.com, the stream on the website, privileging comments there above Super Chats because...
	We need an incentive.
	Yeah, we need to incentivize people to sign up, I guess.
	But there's loads of great content there.
	You can come and talk to us there as well.
	Basically, it's better if this is done on our own platform rather than on YouTube because, you know, YouTube.
	Anyway, let's start talking about Trump's impeachment because this is the only story going on in the American press at the moment.
	It's terribly dull, to be honest.
	I watched a bunch of statements being given.
	It's exactly as predictable as you'd think.
	The Democrats are screeching about insurrection, which obviously didn't happen.
	Honestly, Trump's defense, I mean, his legal team had previously resigned en masse, presumably because it was going to be so socially unacceptable to have defended Trump.
	After this, they were just like, right, it's not worth it.
	And the legal team he got in was not brilliant, in my opinion.
	There was the main chap whose name is something I can't recall off the top of my head, although I should have it here.
	Oh dear, I can't remember it.
	But the main chap doing it wasn't phenomenal.
	I mean, he wasn't bad, it was just...
	I don't know, maybe it's because we're always ahead of the curve, and so he's giving, like, arguments we were making, like, two or three years ago, and it's like, yeah, okay.
	But weren't they arguing the constitutionality at this point?
	Yes, yeah.
	They've not gone to the juicy part of it, which is...
	The fact that he didn't do what they're accusing him of doing.
	Yes, the incitement part.
	Yeah, the main thrust of it is indeed the constitutionality of it, which I think is actually the weakest case.
	Not that I'm any kind of expert on this.
	No, but it's very legal.
	It's very legal and boring.
	Yeah, exactly.
	But the thing is, the view from the Democrats can essentially be summed up as Pam Keith Esquire here, a verified checkmark on Twitter.
	Osama bin Laden did not fly planes into any US buildings.
	Right, okay, so we're defending Osama bin Laden now.
	That's cringe.
	I mean, do I have to answer that?
	Like, he didn't ask people to storm the Capitol.
	He didn't give them money to storm the Capitol.
	He didn't tell them when to storm the Capitol.
	And he didn't launch the execution from afar.
	So, it's not.
	On all of those points.
	Yeah.
	I think Bin Laden was actually trending in response to this tweet.
	A bunch of other leftists also jumped on it.
	So, you know, yas queen.
	Yeah.
	But, no.
	No queen.
	Yeah, just no queen and maybe sit down and get off Twitter.
	But 189,000 likes.
	Like, that is a massively viral tweet, and it's like, okay, how is Trump different to bin Laden?
	It's like, well, I guess he's not, from your perspective.
	But anyway, this is what Trump actually said at the inauguration speech.
	We're going to walk down to the Capitol...
	And we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.
	And we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
	Because you'll never take back our country with weakness.
	You have to show strength and you have to be strong.
	We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing.
	And only count the electors who have been lawfully slated.
	Lawfully slated.
	I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
	Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity.
	That's the clip that is not played on any major network right now.
	We'll get to that.
	We'll get to that.
	But the important words there being peacefully and patriotically.
	You know, just like Bin Laden was saying before the 9-11 attacks, peaceful and patriotic.
	It's crystal clear.
	And it couldn't be any more clear.
	And then on the day, as we've previously seen, Trump tweeted out, when he still had a Twitter account, this video.
	I know you're pained.
	I know you're hurt.
	We had an election that was stolen from us.
	It was a landslide election, and everyone knows it, especially the other side.
	But you have to go home now.
	We have to have peace.
	We have to have law and order.
	We have to respect our great people in law and order.
	We don't want anybody hurt.
	It's a very tough period of time.
	There's never been a time like this where...
	Okay, if we can stop it there, John, because we get the point, right?
	He's not only not calling for violence, he's calling for his people to go home and stop being violent.
	But I mean, he is apparently right, according to Time magazine, about the fact that it was a landslide for Trump, and everyone knows it, especially the other side.
	From the Time secret history of the cabal, they say, Podhors was warning everyone that he knew polls were underestimating Trump's support.
	Most analysts had recognised there would be a blue shift in key backgrounds, but they hadn't comprehended how much better Trump was likely to do on election day.
	Yeah, it seems that Time Magazine can confirm that they knew it was going to be a landslide, which is why the cabal had to fortify the election.
	Then we've got Sky News is reporting on this, and it's important to note that we specifically included the peacefully and patriotic nature of the protest, because Sky didn't.
	Let's have a watch.
	Donald Trump's second impeachment trial, itself a moment of American history, beginning with the simple question of whether Congress has the right to try a former president at all.
	What we expected to be procedural, though, quickly became very visceral.
	I'll show you.
	And after this, we're going to walk down, and I'll be there with you.
	We're going to walk down.
	We're going to walk down to the Capitol.
	Senators shown this cinematic retelling of the events of January the 6th, presented as evidence those seeking to convict Trump using his words.
	We fight like hell.
	And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.
	And those of his supporters, together with images of the day.
	Their case is that Trump issued a direct call to the mob to attack the Capitol, an incitement to insurrection for which he must pay.
	I mean, literally just directly cut it before he said peacefully and patriotically.
	The editor knew.
	The person who edited that did know.
	And it was exactly the same on the BBC. My dad sent me a clip, so I don't know what I'm even looking at.
	Did they edit literally the riots instead of him saying peacefully and patriotically?
	Not as bad, but it was just like, he said, you have to fight like hell, and then just cut the rioting, and he was like, look at what he's done.
	And it was pathetic.
	That's not what happened.
	Sky News is at least privately funded, let's say.
	I guess.
	But the BBC isn't.
	It's funded by the taxpayer.
	Yep.
	So, just deceptive editing on the part of the media, just roundly.
	That was just the example from Sky.
	But of course, like you say, this was everywhere.
	But if you actually have to fact-check this, as Newsweek did about a week ago, you've kind of got to...
	Well, actually, Trump didn't instigate this.
	As they say, you know, did Trump say to peacefully and patriotically march to the Capitol?
	So they give the clip of Trump saying, you know, I know that everyone will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
	And they say, well, however, Trump's call to display strength shows a possible contradiction in Trump's message to his crowd before the certification vote.
	Does it?
	I mean, a call to strength is not necessarily violence.
	I mean, I guess, to put it mildly, in fact, most times in your life when you're expected to show strength, you're not in the middle of a fight.
	You're doing something that's difficult, and it takes strength of will, strength of character, strength of mind, you know, occasionally strength of body, but that doesn't have to be violence either.
	It could be, do you have the strength to lift this thing up onto the top shelf, or something like that.
	There are plenty of ways to use strength.
	And so, essentially, they had to certify this as being mostly true.
	Yeah, he did say peace to me and patriotically.
	But you'll notice there, like, any time anyone anti-progressive says something, the media types have to take it literally.
	There can never be any room for, like, oh, that's a joke or a sarcasm.
	Or it's just political rhetoric, which is much like the...
	We'll get to all this in a minute, right?
	But anyway, so they say the president did say the crowd was going to march peacefully and patriotically to the Capitol.
	After the attack, Trump said he does not condone violence.
	However, it does not necessarily mean the president did not incite violence with the rest of his speech or rhetoric prior to January 6th.
	Doesn't make any sense.
	But that's not the question.
	Before then, did he?
	Well, I mean, A, he didn't.
	But why are you even asking that question?
	And if that's the case, why not just show some of the Democrats talking as well?
	Which is what one of his impeachment lawyers is planning to do, incidentally.
	Yeah, good, basically.
	I didn't see it yesterday, so I don't know if it was done yesterday.
	I assume it's going to be in the trial that's doubtless going to get dragged out, where they're going to be showing all of this footage.
	There is loads of it.
	I misordered this.
	Sorry, John, in the notes.
	But we won't play it.
	But there are various clips of it.
	If we can just get up the YouTube video of the clips, John.
	Sorry, I misordered this.
	Two ahead, I think.
	Yeah, that one, yeah.
	So, there are loads of these videos going around.
	For some reason, this one only has 64 views, but if you want to find it, it's in the show notes, linked on logistics.com, on the podcast webpage.
	It's just Democrats inciting violence before you straight.
	It's two and a half minutes made up by, clipped together by Cauldron Pool, of Democrats openly inciting violence.
	And we've seen it all before, so I'm not even going to waste our time with it.
	Anyway, like you said, Trump's team has put out a statement on Gab.
	I don't know if the God Emperor himself has been doing this, As you said earlier, they're focusing heavily on the fact that he's a private citizen being impeached, and impeachment is to remove him from office, so that doesn't make sense.
	I mean, yes, I guess, but I feel that this is the weaker claim, because he wasn't inside violence.
	And there probably is, I think there was a precedent from like 1870 that something similar to this had happened, and...
	So they impeached someone who wasn't in office for the sake of preventing them running again.
	But even then, none of this actually matters, this part of it, because this is just going to go down partisan lines when it comes to the Senate.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	Which it is.
	And this is the thing, Trump's being compared to Confederate generals, basically.
	And it's like, right, that's...
	Absurd.
	But then you just compared him to Bin Laden, so, I mean, you know, who knows?
	But yeah, the first day of the trial was not a particularly impressive performance.
	I have to say, I mean, some of the coverage was fair, honestly.
	Some of it was like, well, it's kind of rambling and, like, losing focus.
	And it's like, yeah, that's true.
	These aren't the best and brightest, as far as I was concerned.
	But then we got some incisive commentary from Jim Acosta at CNN. And Jim's view on this, I mean, if you're using words like this, Jim, I would say get off of Twitter.
	All right, let's watch this.
	But Jake, I mean, that is really putting lipstick on the pig.
	I mean, this was a hot mess that we saw unfold during the impeachment team's presentation earlier today.
	One advisor, as I was just saying, saying that the former president would be effed.
	I won't use the actual word effed, though, if he ever ends up in criminal court, Jake.
	Right, so it's a hot mess and he's effed, according to roving CNN correspondent Jim Acosta.
	Thanks for that professionalism, Jim.
	Hot mess.
	That's not something I expected to come out of his mouth.
	Anyway, Raffensperger is moving east.
	Trump, which I find interesting.
	Georgia state officials are investigating Trump's efforts to overturn the election results.
	So a spokesperson for Brad Raffensperger confirmed that his office had opened an investigation into the actions of former President Donald Trump, alleging that he tried to overturn the state's 2020 election results.
	The claims are in response to Trump's phone call where he asked him to find 11,780 votes.
	And Raffensperger, of course, stonewalled.
	He did nothing.
	And he was also name-dropped in Time's secret history of the election.
	Others stressed the heroism of GOP officials like Van Langeveld and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who stood up to Trump at considerable cost.
	Yeah, to Trump?
	Like, what's this cost Brad Raffensperger at this point?
	Absolutely nothing, and he's going on the attack.
	So it's like, okay.
	But there are many, many election irregularities in Georgia, as reported by the Postmillennial here.
	This was one of Trump's lawyers who ended up resigning, who gave a long list of problems, such as the fact that 2,506 felons voted in Georgia, which of course they can't do.
	66,000 underaged people were registered to vote in the state.
	2,400 unregistered people voted.
	10,300 dead people voted and several other anomalies.
	And of course, dozens and dozens of witnesses, over 40, spoke at Cobb County Republican Party headquarters in Georgia on December 10th, 9th, 10th, 13th and 14th.
	Presenting their own evidence and witness testimonies of election irregularities.
	But there's nothing to see here, folks.
	Nothing to see here.
	Brad Raffensperger actually says everything was perfect.
	Perfect election.
	And just a few other things have happened that I thought are worth covering.
	They're coming for your guns.
	Americans, coming for your guns.
	Wouldn't take long, and we knew it wouldn't take long.
	The Supreme Court will hear the Keniglia v.
	Strom case on March 24th, and will decide whether police can enter a home to seize guns without a warrant.
	That sounds free, doesn't it?
	That sounds like what a free country has.
	Police that can just bust into your home and take your property without even having a warrant to do it.
	The First Court of Appeals has sided with the police, stating they should have the right to seize guns without a warrant in case of threats to individual and community safety.
	So there we go.
	This will be the issue that really kicks off the conflict, in my opinion.
	I think this is where things will start getting bad.
	Hopefully the Supreme Court kicked that down.
	Well, you would hope so, wouldn't you?
	But I mean...
	I don't know.
	Are they part of the cabal?
	Well, they've got a Republican majority, so...
	Which stood aside and let Trump get railroaded.
	I mean, I'm not exactly putting a huge amount of hope in this, and who knows?
	Maybe they'll be like, yeah, actually, the police do have the right to come into your house and take your stuff without your permission and without a warrant.
	Who knows?
	But finally, in the election saga, the impeachment saga now, the QAnon shaman has turned on Trump, which is the greatest loss, I think, that the president has suffered.
	Did he release a video with a gun to his head?
	I don't know.
	There's something interesting about this.
	We keep getting breathless dispatches about this guy from the media.
	And I'd never heard of him before.
	Until he turned up looking like an idiot.
	I'd never heard of this guy.
	He wasn't some sort of famous Trump activist or anything like that.
	He was some rando who started blithering on about interdimensional energies and whatnot.
	And he's turned on Donald Trump saying he's deeply disappointed in him for not being honourable.
	Well, I mean, if QAnon Shaman's turned on Trump, I think it's all time for us to pack it all in, isn't it, really?
	What was he referencing?
	Like Julian Assange?
	I actually don't know.
	I should have dug deeper into this.
	But to be honest with you, it didn't seem like worth getting more on his opinion.
	And I don't know why the media keep telling us what it is.
	There's loads of reporting on this guy.
	So who the hell is he?
	Who does he represent?
	Apart from, like...
	Memes.
	Yeah, memes.
	Exactly.
	So, yeah, basically, it wasn't a brilliant first day, frankly.
	I was expecting a bit more of a solid defense from the Trump team.
	The woke, the left, the cabal's attack on Trump was pretty predictable.
	And we already know the outcome because it doesn't look like enough Republicans are going to side with the Democrats.
	So this is all a bit of a show trial, really.
	Anyway.
	So I wanted to mention a couple of things.
	There was that fact check that said, oh, previously you may have said things.
	Well, legally, that's not how it works.
	The United States Standard for Incitement to Violence, I believe, I can't remember the exact case, but the part of it is it has to be imminent.
	And of course, imminent can be interpreted quite widely as drone strikes have shown us.
	But the idea that you said something a month before or a week before and then, you know, didn't say it on the day when an event happened.
	A reasonable interpretation would have to be it's got to be when you've got the crowd there, right?
	If you can incite them to do something.
	So it's loose, but it's not that loose.
	So no, that's not going to stand up.
	But the point I was saying earlier as well about the fact that when a Republican says something, it's always taken extremely literally.
	And when a Democrat says it, but to be honest, it's more progressive than anything.
	Even Steve Bannon, when he said he wanted to get civil servants' heads on pikes outside the White House, no one in their right mind thinks he's being literal there.
	And of course, he's telling a joke.
	But no, no, I can see you doing a big thing.
	But no, he's not.
	He's obviously not.
	But they don't care.
	There's just everything you say will be interpreted in the worst possible way.
	But...
	AOC, the best example, with the concentration camps comment, that's just, you know, it's political speech.
	That's part of the ebbs and flows of political life.
	And that actually incited terrorism.
	I hate it.
	I can't stand it.
	I can't stand it.
	That's the standard and the difference.
	I mean, the Democrats, like, maybe I should have played some of the clip, but you've just got statement after statement after statement of them literally saying, I mean, Joe Biden's saying he'd like to beat Trump up at one point.
	You know, like, they're literally threatening violence.
	They're literally threatening harassment.
	And nothing, nothing happens.
	Trump says we need to go peacefully and protest, peacefully and patriotically protest and, you know, to fight for our democracy or whatever it is.
	That's not in any way unreasonable rhetoric, in my opinion.
	And so, yeah, it's just double standard.
	I can't hate it.
	Yeah, I hate it.
	That's why I cover it.
	I want you guys to hate it as well.
	It's awful.
	Anyway, that's...
	But something that's not awful is France!
	We've got some weirdly good news coming out of France, of all places.
	So we've, like, tepidly been, you know, getting information because the French and the English world don't actually collide that much because of the language barrier.
	News doesn't really come across very easily.
	It's usually done by musket ball.
	That's how we do our diplomatic talks.
	Anyway, so the thing we've been covering was the fact that their response to the massive amount of Islamist attacks that's been taking place has sort of radicalized French politics to understand that, no, there is a serious problem here.
	The Islamists are to get you.
	And the left side of the French, the Macron and whatnot, are finally getting that point.
	It only took years and years of terrorism to realize that actually the Islamists don't like France much.
	Yeah, it's a shame it took that long, that many bodies, but they're there now.
	That many murdered priests.
	Burned down churches.
	Anyway, sorry, Karen.
	So one of the interesting things is they're understanding the ideological parts now.
	So this article came out from the New York Times that got a lot of response.
	France's new public enemy, America's woke left, was the title.
	I say was the title because they changed it.
	Because the response from people saying, haha, this is hilarious.
	So the new title is now, Will American Ideas Tear France Apart?
	Some of its leaders think so.
	So they didn't like the fact that they'd named the woke left and were quickly panicking to be like, wait, no, no, no, it's not our fault.
	It's American Ideas instead.
	Just American Ideas.
	Yeah.
	Just American ones.
	You know, traditional American Ideas like liberty, freedom, gender, non-conformism.
	You know?
	Yeah, these are not traditional ideas that they're referring to.
	Deeply American ideas.
	Didn't come from France or anything.
	So they list a bunch of different instances within the last few months of French politics in which they've come up against woke ideology.
	Yeah.
	And the French are unbelievably based, apparently, from their quotes.
	And this is the first example they give, which is a speech from Macron back when some terrorist attack or another had taken place.
	It's a big, long speech about how Islamism is a big problem.
	But there's also some weird parts in here.
	So he wants the Islamic and French civilisations to understand each other better, which, strange way of phrasing it.
	No, no, I don't agree.
	I think this is a very definite way of phrasing it.
	There are two kinds of civilizations here.
	They've been brought into contact and they don't understand each other.
	I think that's a totally coherent statement.
	That's true, but some of the ways he wants to go about this make me raise an eyebrow that he's not as forward-thinking as you might be imagining.
	So he says, to that end, we will contribute 10 million euros to support initiatives by the Foundation for Islam in France and other areas of culture, history and science.
	I'm thinking in particular of the development of advanced Islamic university studies.
	I have also decided to create a scientific institute of Islamology.
	So the scientific study of Islam.
	I think that's a great idea.
	Because you have a view on this.
	You want to expand?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, so Islam is a non-scientific entity.
	There's nothing about Islam that's scientific.
	It is divinely inspired.
	And so if you start applying scientific standards to it, you're going to find that Islam doesn't stand up to scientific scrutiny.
	And this is, frankly, how the Enlightenment has destroyed All of the what I guess we will call romantic concepts like Islam or heroism or anything like this.
	Anything spiritual, anything that is not quantifiable is not understandable by science.
	And I would suggest that possibly the core of religion is something that isn't quantifiable, which is a spiritual belief in God.
	And this is coming from an atheist who has never felt a spiritual belief in anything, right?
	But this is definitely not going to be good for Islam at all.
	To be under the scrutiny of science is something that no religion can withstand, and they usually get to have their own sort of aesthetic excuse to opt out of this.
	Well, of course.
	But the belief and the meaning and the The magical part of it that makes it worthwhile for a human is outside and usually left outside of this.
	But like the new atheists did with Christianity, there's no particular reason the scientific institute of Islamology can't do with Islam.
	So I would be optimistic that he's taking that big brain of approach, understanding what he's saying, but he also wants to expand the teaching of Arabic within schools, which made me like, ah, maybe he's...
	Maybe.
	I don't know.
	I don't know.
	I'm not sure the idea of...
	So the speech is about preventing separatism, the idea that pushing Arabic teaching in schools is going to help this.
	I would have thought you'd want to integrate the Arab societies into being French and then speaking French.
	Yeah, I don't know.
	I mean, who knows what the plot is, but...
	But the more interesting part about all this is what he then goes on to say.
	Which the New York Times...
	I'm so glad I went to the original French sources because the New York Times has the most tepid interpretation.
	But the original sources in this are just unbelievably good.
	So he says...
	Many of these topics, talking about social science, in France, we used to excel at academically and have been undermined and we have abandoned them.
	And in doing so, we have left the intellectual debate to others, to those outside of the Republic, by ideologicalising it and sometimes yielding to other academic traditions.
	I am thinking of Anglo-Saxon traditions based on a different history, which is not ours.
	Oh, you slimy sons of bitches.
	And when I see certain social science theories entirely imported from the United States, so he is saying Anglo-Saxon, but he is also trying to make sure he's talking about Americans.
	Right.
	So, it should come as no surprise that the people who are generally held up and considered to be the authors of wokeism are people who we would otherwise describe as degenerate French intellectuals, who ended up...
	Foucault is the primary...
	Person on everyone's lips here, I think, but there are a bunch of others, Derrida and various others, who end up creating postmodernism, and this seems to have taken root in American universities, and has now come back to France.
	I mean, I agree that it is something that has come back, you know, that has come to France that was, you know, foreign, but the place that got it was like an infection from France.
	It's like it's mutated and come back.
	Yes.
	I think he is right to say that the modern interpretations, shall we say, are very American, but...
	But don't sit there going, oh, this is Anglo-Saxon traditions.
	No.
	No.
	Not even slightly.
	What this is, is French theory applied to the American social context of race, and then re-imported back to Europe, where that social context doesn't exist, and no one likes to read French theory.
	So there's another part of this.
	So that's the president talking about it.
	His education secretary is incredibly based, who gave an interview in response to Samuel Paty.
	This was a guy who was murdered for showing the Mohammed cartoons.
	And the parts of this interview, I can't get over how they're able to get away with talking like this in France, but maybe that's a condemnation of the Anglo world.
	I think it might be.
	So the interviewer asks, you categorized Islamo-leftism, which is wreaking havoc on the university.
	Who are you targeting?
	Islamo-leftists.
	Come on, I was perfectly clear.
	And his response here, no one has the right to cowardice anymore.
	Yes.
	There is a fight to be waged against an intellectual matrix coming from American universities and intersectional thesis.
	Yes!
	It's what I've been saying!
	It's exactly what I've been saying.
	I hope he answers it.
	And also, I've been watching a lot of Saga of a Cat on YouTube.
	Make some good points.
	I don't like his French batting, but...
	But he is right about the wokest.
	So talking about this theory, so he says, it is the breeding ground for a fragmentation in our society and a vision of the world which converges with the interests of Islamists.
	That's correct.
	This reality has played a significant part of French social sciences.
	In particular, I challenge anyone to tell me opposite.
	No one can.
	Can't change your mind.
	Can't change your mind.
	That's totally true.
	The other two parts of this they took out were just great.
	So him saying, some do it consciously, others are useful idiots for this cause.
	Completely correct.
	Nice.
	And then talking of the, so he talks about a socialist candidate, he just says he's the new Islamo-leftist.
	And he says, well, why are they doing this?
	this and he says they seek muslims as a substitute for their lost votes okay so he's right on every point and I can't find it!
	And I actually really appreciate the direct way that he's putting this across.
	This is very heartening, actually.
	I can't believe it's the French that are actually leading the charge on this, though.
	How embarrassing.
	Yeah, the English Education Secretary and the Prime Minister should be talking like this for the last 10 years.
	I mean, you could see even David Cameron, by the end of it, he started out his Prime Ministership saying Islam is a religion of peace endlessly.
	Mm-hmm.
	And he ended it by realising, ah, we've got some unique problems here that need to be solved.
	Even Tony Blair has completely rescinded his views on Islam.
	Millions of Muslims are fundamentally incompatible with the modern world.
	It's like, Jesus, Tony.
	Their views.
	Yeah, yeah, their views, sorry, yeah.
	But it's like, that's the UKIP talk, Tony.
	Like...
	So that's the two points that the New York Times are like, oh good, the French elite are revolting against wokeism and they're calling it American ideology.
	But they give us another couple of examples which I think begin to more demonstrate this.
	So the first one is about ballet, which is, of course, a big tradition in France in art.
	And one of the parts of that art is blackface.
	So they have various ballet shows where they had, you know, in the past people were white because there was lack of black and Asian people.
	So they have blackface and yellowface is what they call it.
	It's not my wording.
	And the new guy in charge of the Paris Opera Organization came in, and he's German-born, and he said that we need more diversity within the actors, and also we need to get rid of blackface and yellowface from all of our performances.
	And this got some backlash.
	So he also said that some works will undoubtedly disappear.
	And I was like, okay, so you are destroying works here.
	Yeah, you're destroying culture.
	And the response is, Le Pen denounced it, but also a prominent French newspaper denounced it.
	And the way they did it, I just find great.
	So their main attack on him is, he's an American, for saying this.
	So he's like, Alexander Nerf, who conducted the opera in Toronto, Canada, immersed 10 years in American culture.
	You've immersed yourself in American culture, that's why you're doing this?
	They don't accept any of his premises.
	And I'm somewhat in agreement with that's the reason he's coming at it through this lens.
	And they also say, making works disappear echoes of cancel culture, a continental sport in America for the last five years.
	So they're just like, this is a thing the Americans do.
	We don't do this.
	Get out of here.
	That's not French.
	That's true.
	And I'm just like, yeah, I mean, that's not wrong.
	Cancel culture is very American.
	But it's also the fact of, so the point here about blackface, I'm not trying to defend blackface, I'm just giving the argument for it from the perspective of people who want it there, which is that it's essentially, it is a piece of the art form.
	This has been going on for hundreds of years.
	You cannot come in and say, we need to get rid of this because it's offensive.
	Because, okay, if you accept that blackface needs to go because it's offensive, even though it's a piece of art, okay, yeah, you can say it's offensive.
	Where does that stop?
	Okay, well, then they go to the lyrics.
	These certain lyrics need to go.
	Royal Britannia, the song.
	Rebellious Scots to Crush.
	In which case, where does this end?
	You can argue that, you know, I'm going to critique it, I think it's poor taste or something like this.
	That's fine, no one cares.
	But the argument is, well, if you just claim that something offensive in an art needs to go because it is offensive, there is no end point to that.
	We are abolishing all culture at that point.
	And that's why I like J-Rex's criticism of cultural culture, which is just people saying, cancel this.
	Like, just get rid of culture.
	Cancel it.
	Get rid of all of it.
	I mean, that is what's going to happen.
	Where's the end point?
	And he's right.
	And they don't just have this in France.
	So apparently an African-American principal at the American Ballet Theatre decided to go to Russia.
	She went to the Bolshoi Theater, which is very famous Russian ballet.
	They're very proud of it.
	And she criticized the fact that the Russians were also using blackface in their acts because it's, you know, ages old.
	And the Russian defence I find amazing.
	They defended its use, arguing that it wasn't racist, because that's how classical ballets have always been performed in the country.
	It's not racist, we've always done it.
	But the underlying point is, this is a piece of art, this is how it's been performed, we are going to continue doing that, because you do not destroy art on the basis of offence.
	That's not good enough.
	The Americans struck back though, did you see?
	What did they say?
	They gave it three out of five burgers on Trustpilot.
	Sorry, Americans, I'm just teasing.
	But I find it a compelling argument, actually, which is just, okay, you can find this offensive.
	And I love how it's very much framed as this is an American thing, you guys coming here and being complained about it.
	You know, our people don't generally care, because we understand this is a piece of art.
	Yeah, okay, we all find it offensive time to time, but that's part of the whole thing.
	So...
	Anyway, the New York Times then go on to try and run defense for this whole thing, saying that with all these issues, it has echoes of American culture wars.
	It's like, yeah, because they are American culture wars.
	These are imported.
	The battles began inside French universities.
	How interesting.
	Had to come from the universities.
	And is now being played out increasingly in the media.
	Politicians have been weighing in more and more.
	Yeah, this is the pattern.
	Oh yeah, it's very, very clear to see that left-wing radicals in American universities have taken race relations in America, theorized them, so abstracted them in theory, and then are applying that theory literally everywhere in the world.
	This was the big argument I had with essentially BreadTube a while ago.
	I had to try and explain to them that European countries were actually based on ethnic groups, and they weren't based on revolutionary philosophy, and they called me an ethno-nationalist for this.
	But that's just what history is.
	Like, how do you think England got the name England?
	Deutschland, Deutschland, uber alles.
	Germany over all Germans, no matter where they are.
	Yeah, but like, not even ideologically.
	That's an ideological position, right?
	Yeah, but I mean the German Revolution, before the Nazis, in case people think that's a different reference.
	Yeah, but it doesn't matter, right?
	If you go, just the very nature of nationalism in Europe has been based on ethnic groups.
	The countries themselves are based on ethnic groups.
	France is where the French live.
	You know, Germany is where the Germans live.
	Poland, that's a better example, actually.
	Poland's where the Polish live.
	Why does Poland have a right to exist?
	Well, that's a good question.
	Because the Poles demand independence.
	Exactly.
	It's the home of the Polish.
	But the point is, it doesn't even matter.
	Again, what you're doing is bringing ideological concerns into it.
	If you just speak from a purely descriptive position, to describe Europe and every other country practically, you describe the desire for self-governance by an ethnic group.
	And so the country is named after the ethnic group.
	It's just the way it is.
	Poland, land of the Poles.
	Exactly.
	It's not an assertion of a should or anything.
	That's just what is.
	And I'm actually in agreement that the Poles have a right to self-determination.
	Well, of course they do.
	Of course they do.
	Shoot me.
	Well, then we start getting to group moral claims, and I don't want to cover that now.
	But the point is, the American left, being entirely ideological, view all of that as ethno-nationalism, and therefore inherently racist.
	And so they view...
	Well, no, of course it's not.
	But they view just anything intrinsic like that.
	To be a form of racism.
	Whereas because they come from a revolutionary state, they think that the only thing that makes a nation is the ideology.
	And it's like, that's just not how the rest of the world works.
	That's your very American view of these things.
	And that's not even like the American...
	That's not a universal American view.
	You know, the American right accepts that there is like an ethnic group that are Americans, right?
	It's the American left.
	To which anyone can join.
	It doesn't matter their race.
	Yeah, but...
	Any ethnic group really has incorporative elements, right?
	And so there are currently Muslim Poles, who are very Polish, but they are the result of the wars with the Turks.
	Talk about Russians for a minute.
	The amount of people who think they're Russian, self-identify as Russian, are considered Russian.
	You know, you have Tatars, you have people all the way on the other side of Siberia who are still Russian.
	And every ethnic group has an incorporative aspect to it.
	And the thing is, think about whenever you've been on holiday and you've tried to fit in with local customs, does that offend or delight the locals?
	They love it.
	Exactly.
	They love it.
	Everyone loves to have foreigners come in and recognize the virtue of the thing that you're doing and then try and join in with it.
	It's a natural appeal.
	Of course it's nice.
	It's confirming, it's welcoming, and it's friendliness.
	So every ethnic group has this, but the American left just can't seem to accept that that's a part of reality.
	Yeah, and this leads me on perfectly to the next part I wanted to mention here, the fact that it's definitely an American viewpoint that doesn't understand where it is.
	They mention here that they're trying to defend what's going on.
	mass protests in France against police violence, inspired by the killing of George Floyd.
	French police just like...
	Je t'allors.
	Je t'allors.
	Challenged the official dismissal of race and systematic racism.
	The name George Floyd as well.
	That's not a French name.
	And they then mention the hashtag MeToo generation of feminists confronted both male power and older feminists.
	Hashtag me too.
	That's not French.
	Like, of course these things are not French.
	But just imagining these confused French gendarmes who are just looking at this and going, I don't know.
	And in the background, they're just, Allahu Akbar.
	Speaking of Allahu Akbar, there's another part in here where they're trying to defend what's going on and how what's taking place, this war on woke, is a bad thing.
	It's evil what they're doing.
	So because this...
	Oh, man, sorry.
	I can't pronounce the name because it's very foreign.
	What is this?
	Abdelayai...
	Yeah, let's not try.
	Who's an expert on Islamophobia.
	Of course they are.
	Oh, so he's an Islamo-leftist.
	Yeah, and he said his subject focus became increasingly difficult post-2015 because after a bunch of terrorist attacks in France, government funding for research dried up.
	Researchers on the subject were accused of being apologists for Islamists and even terrorists.
	And then with the funding gone, he then had to move to Brussels to do his research, where he founded Greater Academic Freedom.
	And he says in response to this movement, saying that this is apologetics, on the question of Islamophobia, it's only in France where there is such violent talk of rejecting the term.
	Well, that's a shame.
	I hate the fact that we have embraced the term in England.
	Because anti-Muslim bigotry...
	Did the Conservatives actually embrace the term Islamophobia?
	It's in law.
	Oh, it's in law now.
	Yeah, but that's the problem.
	The definition of the word was difficult for them to settle on.
	And so they were like, well, it's a form of racism.
	Because it's an absurd term.
	Islamophobia doesn't make sense.
	This is a debate for anyone at another time.
	If anyone's wondering what we're talking about, anti-Muslim bigotry versus Islamophobia.
	Yeah, but they were unable to define Islamophobia as, they were like, it's a form of racism rooted in racism.
	And it's like, okay, you don't have a good definition here.
	It's going around in circles.
	And they mentioned in response to this person's claims that they were being accused.
	He was like, yeah, you were.
	The education minister said that such people were under American influence and were complicit with terrorists by providing intellectual justification behind their acts.
	I've got to interview this guy.
	This guy's amazing.
	Okay, so I just want to stress, right?
	There seems to be a difference in intellect between the French politicians and the British politicians.
	We seem to be led by midwits, and they seem to actually have people who know what they're talking about.
	That's disturbing to me.
	This guy got a lot of support as well for all this.
	Good!
	The next article is them talking about the fact that a hundred intellectuals have signed on saying that this is a good idea, what he says is true.
	So the next one jump after this.
	So, they take a quote from him saying, very powerful Islamo-leftists in sections of society and higher education, which are damaging people's minds, and this leads to certain problems, which you are seeing.
	Terrorism.
	That's exactly what we've been saying, basically.
	They signed a document saying, we academics and researchers can only agree with this observation.
	Correct.
	It's just like, yes, this is absolutely right.
	They later go on to say that, I don't know how to say these properly, but indigenous, racialist, and decolonial ideologies transferred from North American campuses are very present, fueling a hatred of whites and of France.
	So they're talking about the French part of it.
	Hang on, that's totally true.
	And the French response to that should be something along the lines of, well, the French people are indigenous to France.
	I haven't finished the second, so it gets more fortified.
	The importation of Anglo-Saxon communitarian ideologies, intellectual conformism, fear...
	He's French!
	Yeah, okay, the anti-Anglo-Saxon.
	No, but that's not...
	Give me a second, I'm trying to finish a quote now.
	Intellectual conformism, fear, and political correctness are a real threat to our universities.
	Freedom of speech tends to be drastically restricted here, as witnessed by recent numerous cases of censorship by pressure groups.
	I mean, yes.
	So they're calling out the American brand of this.
	They're just wrong in saying that it comes from America, inherently.
	Oh, yes.
	Anglo-Saxon communitarianism is the problem.
	Nothing continental communitarianism.
	That's an Anglo-Saxon word, isn't it?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's like, you...
	All of the fingerprints lead us back to French intellectuals.
	All of them.
	So one of the signatories writes some of his thoughts here, which are also just based on how there's just no political correctness.
	These people don't care.
	So he says, American influence has led to a sort of prohibition in universities to think outside of a phenomenon of political Islam in the name of leftist ideology that considers it a religion of the underprivileged.
	Totally right.
	Totally correct.
	Well done.
	Researchers of race, Islamophobia, and post-colonialism were motivated by hatred of the West as a white civilization.
	That's how they define it.
	True.
	It's like, yeah, that's how they define it.
	They can only think through the lens of race.
	They can't accept that a black person could become French.
	And that is an American import.
	Yeah.
	That makes no sense in the context of France, which believes fundamentally that Algeria is still part of it.
	But the thing is, it doesn't even make sense in the context of America either, because obviously the Republicans being, quote, the Democrats from about 120 years ago, the party of the Negro, the American Republicans have this kind of incorporative view of America.
	We're correct to point that out.
	It only makes sense in American leftist context.
	Yeah.
	American right-wing context.
	Absolutely not.
	I've never met a Republican who gives a damn about race.
	Never met one.
	So, and the last bit from him here, saying, the common agenda of these enemies of European civilization can be summed up in three words.
	Decolonize, demasculate, and de-Europeanize.
	Jesus.
	Why can't our politicians be like this?
	I wish, I really wish.
	Like, where was Boris, man?
	Yeah!
	We're upset with Boris for being so pathetic on these issues since he got in.
	But then I look at the guys who are in positions in France and I'm just like, I didn't realise how bad we have it.
	It really is bad.
	And the New York Times article just ends with them pattering on about the fact that this is an American boogeyman and how dare they get upset about this.
	You're one of the primary purveyors of this, New York Times, which you must be aware of.
	Yeah.
	Although there is one quote in the middle of it, which I wanted to leave till the end, where they actually take your position and they say there's a bit of a problem here, fellas.
	But far from being American, many of the leading thinkers behind theories on gender, race, and post-colonialism and queer theory came from France.
	Yes, exactly.
	Exactly.
	That's why it's not Anglo-Saxon communitarianism, you lying sacks of bloody...
	I just love this because this is basically everything we've experienced for the last 10 years and the French are going through it in the last couple of years in an extreme way because of the Islamic terrorism as well making the whole situation accelerated and I love it I love how they...
	Our societies have been so slow, like Douglas Murray's quote on his, that we move at the speed of the slowest kid in the classroom, whereas the French haven't.
	They've really understood the problems here, and they're getting to the end point, which is, no, woke ideology, for lack of a better term, is cancer and needs to be outrooted from every institution.
	I mean, yes.
	Even if you can't take responsibility for the monster you birthed with your silly, silly intellectuals.
	They're trying to fob it off, which is kind of pathetic, but at least they've got to the end point.
	I'm willing to allow them to fob that off onto the Americans.
	If they want to call it Americanism, I don't care, as long as they understand the problem.
	Yeah, sorry for Americans as well, but it does come from America.
	It's the American leftist campuses that made this, what it is.
	Yeah, it is.
	And, I mean, it's now here with us all.
	And thank God the French are doing something.
	I mean, what are we doing about it?
	Kimmy Badendock said that she was going to get rid of critical race theory.
	Yeah, I mean, Kemi's been great.
	I've got no criticisms of Kemi.
	I saw an article from The Express trying to gin up that Priti Patel was going to get rid of hate speech laws, at least, but there's no evidence for it.
	And they're not saying anything.
	What are you waiting for?
	You could do it tomorrow.
	Liz Truss, Kemi Bainock, fantastic people who are doing the groundwork.
	No one else there seems to be doing or saying anything.
	And it's depressing when you've given the fact, like Boris, he seems to understand the problem.
	Yeah.
	Got into the seat of Prime Minister and his head went empty.
	The spine just dribbled out.
	And the thing is, well, the Conservatives seem to be bullheadedly unwilling to interact with any Conservative activism against wokeness.
	There's a very, very, very narrow range of criticisms that the Conservatives will accept against wokeness, and it's really insufferable.
	But anyway, speaking...
	Just love some of the chat.
	I love France now.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Well, fuck, I love France now.
	It's like, yeah, I know, right?
	I mean, who could have known that I... I mean, I mocked Macron for saying he was going to have a Jupiterian presidency, but I mean, okay.
	I'm not sure I trust him still.
	If I was a French citizen, I'd probably be voting Le Pen anyway.
	Well, maybe, but I'm happy with that rhetoric.
	That's a hell of an attack.
	You've got to deal with Islam and leftism.
	It's literally what I've been saying.
	But anyway, so the consequences of the French slug trail of the United States and then back again is manifesting itself in the Scottish National Party that is currently being torn apart by the definition of woman, and I love it.
	I love watching this.
	The important issue.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Kitchen table issues.
	Mum, am I a woman?
	I don't know.
	Nicola Sturgeon came out and said you are.
	That's how it works.
	Well, that's exactly how it works.
	And that's what the question is.
	Does Nicola Sturgeon say trans rights?
	This was back in April 2019.
	And she was asked to clarify the SNP's stance on transgender rights because of a leak of private messages between three prominent female members of the Scottish Parliament who claimed that the first female minister was out of step with her party.
	Now, you can imagine what this is.
	Very, very sort of Labour...
	Reflection of what happened with Labour, Nicola Sturgeon and a bunch of woke activists have come up in the SNP and now there's a woke lobby in the SNP that's turning the SNP really, really woke.
	The conversation was leaked from a thing, and it's in response to proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act, which would allow individuals to change their legal gender by means of self-declaration.
	I don't think there is such a thing as legal gender.
	I think we only have sex on official documents.
	So sex is male and female.
	That's my understanding.
	Yeah, so I don't even know what the Scots are doing here.
	I mean, maybe in Scotland they have a distinction there for some reason.
	I have no idea.
	I mean, you know, who wants to know?
	Rebuild Hadrian's Wall.
	But Sturgeon described these concerns as being misplaced, saying, As an ardent, passionate feminist, and have been all my life, I don't see the greater recognition of transgender rights as a threat to me as a woman or to my feminism.
	And now you know where Nicola Sturgeon stands on the question.
	But anyway, Sturgeon came out openly against transphobia a little while afterwards, back on the 28th of January.
	In fact, no, this was this year, so this was very recently, where she said that transphobia should be treated with zero tolerance in the same way as racism or homophobia.
	So, issue resolved, really.
	The TERFs.
	They're all going to get locked up.
	They're all going to get locked up.
	So, some senior SNP figures had criticized Sturgeon over this.
	They are concerned about the potential that allowing people to self-identify their gender would have on women's rights.
	Whoa, whoa, whoa.
	You think there's such a thing as a woman anymore?
	No, we've abolished that.
	In areas such as single-sex changing rooms and women-only shortlists.
	I love the fact that transgenderism has destroyed women-only shortlists.
	I mean, I didn't like women-only shortlists because it's identity politics.
	So it's interesting how they've been erased.
	The liberals here have lost the battle, but the...
	We've also won the battle.
	Yeah.
	Playing the long game.
	Women-only shortlists are anti-meritocratic and anti-individualist.
	That's okay.
	We can get rid of those for you.
	But yeah, she'd posted a video message to Twitter saying that she'd heard reports that mainly young people in significant numbers were leaving the SNP because they do not consider the party to be a safe, tolerant place for trans people.
	Yeah.
	Imagine me taking any action on that, right?
	But where are they going to go?
	Like, what party is more leftist in Scotland than the SNP? They do have a socialist party.
	Oh, well, there we go.
	They can go to the socialist party.
	I do wonder if they're a bit George Galloway.
	Well, exactly, right?
	I mean, it could be a bit more traditionalist.
	But she pledged to do everything I can do to change that impression and persuade all of you that the SNP is your party.
	Sorry, I should put it on a Scottish accent.
	And that you should come home where you belong Right.
	And so, yeah, we get to the Gender Recognition Act.
	Basically, as the Guardian have reported, she said trans rights and supports call for reform because an increasingly toxic online environment has caused some younger people to question their commitment to the SNP. So Sturgeon is responding to a Guardian article.
	Tell me.
	Tell me the number.
	Yeah, exactly.
	About a bunch of Twitter leftists who are whining about pronouns.
	And it's currently racking the SNP. Out for Independence, which is an official LGBT plus wing of the SNP, Four of whose executive committee had resigned in protest over the past week said the most important action to follow must be an overhaul of internal disciplinary procedures which have not been used to protect people where they should have been.
	Mad.
	I love it.
	Yeah.
	Someone didn't gender you correctly.
	There needs to be internal disciplinary procedures for this.
	This will be law.
	I know.
	This will be law in Scotland.
	No, this will be law in England.
	Eventually.
	That's only because we have the Conservatives in charge.
	The Scottish Trans Alliance said, We hope that Sturgeon's words will be followed up by the meaningful actions she says she is determined they will be.
	And it called for those actions to include improving the delivery of trans healthcare, with priority of reducing waiting times hate crime protection and reform of the Gender Recognition Act.
	There was opposition to this, obviously.
	Guess who?
	Ankula?
	No.
	Hamza Yusuf?
	No.
	He's woke.
	No, of course not.
	He's woke.
	He's an Islamo-leftist.
	So, you know, no.
	The resistance came from middle-aged fat lesbians.
	Based?
	Otherwise known as TERFs.
	And I'm on their side, just so you know.
	I stand with the lesbians, the man-hating lesbians.
	I'm with you girls.
	Years ago I wasn't, but it turns out there was something worse behind you.
	Just bans, fellas.
	Yes, just bans.
	But the Women's Pledge Group was launched at the SNP's 2019 conference in By various MPs, MSPs and councillors with concerns about gender recognition reform.
	They condemned the abuse of all party members and added, Women have serious and valid concerns about their rights to privacy, dignity, safety and fairness.
	Not anymore, they don't!
	Sorry, there's no such thing as a woman anymore.
	The group said women raising concerns have been labelled as transphobic and hateful, highlighting the online abuse of one Joanne Cherry, who is one of its founders.
	Like the First Minister, we believe the debate should be respectful.
	However, some individuals oppose any sort of debate on this.
	And yeah, so Joanne Cherry has been harassed by the obviously sane people.
	The obviously sane people have subjected her to what she calls an 18-month campaign of abuse.
	She was removed from her post as the party's justice and home affairs spokesman in Westminster, and she contacted the police over a vicious threat to her personal safety after she said she'd been sent.
	The tolerant LGBT lobby.
	The tolerant left.
	Going against the clearly sane LGBT lobby is going against the clearly sane anti-LGBT lobby in, again, one of those monkey fights that I'm just standing on the sidelines, fight, fight, fight, throwing money in.
	Well, that's the thing.
	I do find myself actually having sympathy with the TERFs, not just on a bit of like, okay, you guys are clearly right on the issue.
	But, you know, like meeting Posey Parker, for example.
	You can see the concern on her.
	She's like, well, if we put transgender people in prison, we have the cases.
	Women end up getting raped.
	Well, it's not good, is it?
	Well, there are real consequences of what's being demanded here.
	And ironically, the TERFs are in the right on this issue.
	They're not in the right on most other issues, but on this they're actually correct.
	But we'll get to it in a second, right?
	So...
	The police have confirmed that a 30-year-old man has been charged with a communications offence in connection with the incident.
	Now, I don't know what to...
	I mean, man?
	The police said it was a man.
	Yeah, or are the police just being bigots and oppressing a beautiful trans person?
	And harming other trans people and preventing them from coming out as their true selves.
	The police will just have to arrest themselves, I guess.
	I guess so.
	And the BBC for reporting incorrectly.
	But anyway...
	They're down in London.
	They're outside their jurisdiction.
	Miss Cherry was removed from her role because of what was considered to be unacceptable behaviour, which was the fact that she had written in the New Statesman...
	Get ready for this.
	Women are adult human females.
	Good.
	Unacceptable behaviour.
	Got her removed from her job.
	Writing in a national newspaper, a dictionary definition.
	And got her death threats.
	Because she believes that the definition of what a woman is, is an adult human female.
	The Posey Parker position.
	The perfectly, you know, sane position of the definition.
	The Oxford English Dictionary definition, yes.
	No, it's not just an appeal to the dictionary, though.
	Like, the definition, the only one that makes sense.
	Because otherwise you end up in the position, as we've talked about previously, where you end up saying it's formless, timeless, and blah, blah, blah, blah.
	The Cthulhu definition, or the standard definition.
	And she's for the sane.
	Really, what we should call it is the essentialist definition.
	because these are essential characteristics, whereas the radical left-wing Islamofeminist position is that there is no such thing as a woman, really.
	But yeah, so this has been quite bad.
	And obviously death threat's terrible.
	You know, none of this should happen, but it is.
	She says, For some time, a small but vocal cohort of my SMP colleagues has engaged in performative histrionics, redolent of the Salem witch trials.
	The question, do you believe or have you ever believed that women are adult human females, is one I must answer in the affirmative, but it is not a response that is popular with some who have the ear of the leadership?
	They should have a vote on it in Parliament.
	I know.
	See how that goes.
	Yeah, what's a woman?
	No, honestly, honestly, the Conservatives, this is a goldmine for you guys.
	Just do it.
	Just ask.
	Is the definition of a woman an adult human female?
	See how the votes lie.
	But just, how is this where our civilisation has arrived at?
	Right, okay, now we're examining the definition of woman.
	Thanks, France.
	Thanks.
	You did this.
	And I know you can be like, oh, but it's the Americans and they're what you use.
	the Anglo-Saxons yeah no no no you did this You did this.
	But anyway, so she says it's frustrating because advocating for women's sex-based rights under the Equality Act expressing concerns about self-identification of gender and opposing curtailment of free speech are not evidence of transphobia.
	Well, that's where you're wrong, kiddo.
	Oh, I love it.
	I love how all of this is coming down on them.
	Now, on Lotuses.com, of course, you can find my article that I wrote, The Case Against the Intersectional Definition of Woman, where I've laid out all of the, I think, most compelling arguments.
	The fact that it's not a definition.
	A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman is not a sentence.
	It's recursive, self-referencing.
	It's no use whatsoever.
	Again, why adult human female is actually a useful definition.
	There are various other arguments.
	Basically, it requires us to fall back on the traditional definition by presupposition.
	It also empties the term of all content and essentially destroys it.
	There are other concerns, but I'm not going to go through them all.
	Read it in your own time.
	Read it in your own time.
	It's very good stuff.
	And I think, finally, we should just say that England is not exempt from the problems of France and Scotland, unfortunately.
	I can see people posting in the chat, give me some chest milk.
	Yeah.
	What's that about?
	Yeah.
	It's no longer breast milk.
	Because that's transphobic.
	It's chest milk.
	That's according to the NHS. Midwives have been instructed to say chest feeding instead of breastfeeding to be more trans-friendly.
	You don't think a woman's an adult human female, do you?
	Look at you, you primitive peasant.
	You think that milk comes from breasts and not chests!
	Do you think male cows produce milk?
	Because if you do, that's not milk.
	I'm just saying I've moved to a vegan-friendly substitute at this point, but I'm just saying...
	Could you imagine?
	Why isn't that an argument?
	In the name of trans-acceptance, we're going to start milking male cows, mixing it in with the milk of female cows.
	The bulls really seem to like identifying as females.
	I don't know what it is.
	But this was according to Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, which is exactly what you'd expect.
	Brighton being the Portland of Britain.
	Breast milk should be described as, quote, human milk.
	Brilliant.
	I love it.
	We're going to do a podcast at some point about the devaluation of language.
	And I love this.
	Breast milk has connotations that include woman, which includes adult human female, which includes...
	A whole raft of things that are associated with women.
	But if you just compact it down to human milk, it just sounds gross, doesn't it?
	Or milk from the feeding mother or parent.
	I'm surprised they're okay with the term mother, to be honest.
	But yeah, as you can see here, we've got replaced maternity with perinatal.
	Make it all scientific.
	Make it all scientific.
	This is why we should apply science to Islam, really.
	I'm loving how upset I made the chat.
	Sorry.
	Just let us know on a scale of 1 to 10 burgers how upset you are.
	How much you like your milk drinking milk.
	Drink your trans-friendly milk.
	Go on.
	So the reason for this, of course, is that a policy document, as explains, gender identity can be a source of oppression and health inequality.
	We also recognise there is currently biological essentialism and transphobia present within elements of mainstream birth narratives and discourse.
	There is biological essentialism in mainstream birth narratives.
	Yes.
	No, there is.
	There absolutely is.
	The essential biological component of birth is that a baby grows inside a woman's stomach.
	And then eventually the baby is exposited via the birth canal.
	As a new human being.
	That's very essentially biological.
	There's very few things that are more biological than that.
	It's an incredibly biological process.
	And they're like, yeah, but there's a lot of biological essentialism and transphobia in mainstream narratives about birth.
	Yes, there are.
	Yes, there are.
	There's a lot of transphobia in birth, that's what I'm saying.
	Yeah, there is.
	Not many men give birth to babies, Mr.
	Obviously Sane Person.
	Don't know why I have to have this conversation with you.
	Again, reality.
	Smacking up against it.
	NHS! This is the NHS Hospitals Trust that's giving out this advice.
	And it's like, okay, so at least the French, the Scots are totally lost to this, we're totally lost to this, but the French are going to be a shining bastion of embarrassing Frenchness for all time, at the rate we're going.
	The worst part is they'll French it up as well.
	Yeah, they are.
	They're going to French it up.
	And then they're going to blame the English for it.
	Yeah, I forgot to say, but it's incredibly French, isn't it?
	Like, causing a problem and then being like, they've done this to us!
	Yeah, exactly!
	That's exactly it!
	That is exactly it!
	But, I mean, at least they've got the balls to fight back.
	Anyway, that's...
	God, another thought I'd say about France.
	Please help us.
	Oh, yeah.
	Save us, France.
	Now I know how the Americans feel.
	Save us from Britain.
	It's just a law.
	Now it's save us from wokeness.
	So we have a video comment first.
	Yep.
	Norwegian money to our British heroes by way of gold membership.
	I've been wondering about the core mentality of right and left.
	Is it as straightforward as the right equals conservatism and left equals progressivism?
	From what I can tell, it's a mindset that divides whether you're one or the other.
	If you're conservatively minded, you're ensuring that your footing is solid and safe before you attempt anything different.
	Slow and steady wins the race.
	If you're progressively minded, you're less focused on solid footing as it is the goal that you're chasing after to manage the most.
	The quicker to bear.
	What are your thoughts on this?
	Well, like all bad ideas, the concept of left and right in politics came from France, and now has infected the Anglosphere and we're not going to get blamed for it.
	Yeah, it came from the National Assembly in France, where on the right you had the conservative monarchists.
	Again, conservatism as a philosophy didn't really exist at the time.
	It's actually something that was developed after the French Revolution, because obviously there's no need to develop a sort of conservative theory of monarchism when you live under a monarchy.
	But basically, it seems to be about just your personal temperament.
	I think really it's the question for the psychologist to address whether you become left or right.
	But, I mean, if you're not in favour of scientific leftism, as the French appear to be objecting, then you can't really be left-wing.
	Because the right, if it is made up of purely or merely traditional elements, then if that's going to be the divergence, then that's it.
	I would agree with half of his analysis, though, that the left is progressivism.
	But I also agree with you that left-right should actually be dropped.
	And because all of these things are relative, they work for a relative political landscape, right?
	And the landscape for the Anglo world at this point, let's say, I would think is better demonstrated by just progressive, non-progressive.
	I think those two things are the things that are butting heads.
	And until that changes, that's how I think about it.
	Yeah, there's no point thinking about this in terms of left and right, because as we can see...
	Yeah, Posey Parker.
	Yeah, the left is getting chewed up by intersectionality, so it doesn't care about the left-right dichotomy, really.
	So why should we?
	Michael Ebel says, Hey Lotus Eaters, we've been wanting to get your opinion on this for a while.
	How would you tackle the leftist machine at this point?
	If you cut off the heads, two more will grow back in their place.
	On the other hand, what would it take to change people's minds about wokeness, fear-mongering, and hate-driven politics?
	The reason that two heads grow back is because of the unbelievable funding that the left gets.
	If the left didn't get unbelievable funding in a position of privilege in newspapers and politicians' minds and all of this sort of thing, then it wouldn't.
	So those things need to go.
	The left should stop being given privileges.
	It should stop being given money.
	And I assume we should just follow the French example on this, actually.
	It should be like, no, this is cancer.
	Defund it.
	They literally did.
	She had to move to Belgium because they were like, no, you're just funding excuses for terrorism.
	Yeah.
	I think he's right.
	Yeah.
	That seems to be the first thing.
	And change people's minds about workness?
	I mean, I guess ask them whether they think there's a biologically essential component to childbirth.
	I mean, that seems to be a good place to start.
	Because who could deny that?
	You have to be an obviously sane person to deny that.
	The problem you have there is you have to have someone who's getting to that point in their life.
	Because when you're in university and not thinking about these things in any meaningful manner, it's very easy to convince someone that it's not because they have no idea what they're talking about.
	I don't know.
	I think I could persuade students that actually there was a biological component to human birth.
	I think it's a tougher sell.
	Robert Evans says, Hi Carl, six years ago my closest friend recommended me listen to your channel on YouTube.
	I was skeptical because at the time I was an avowed leftist.
	My gut reaction was that you were a racist and misogynist.
	How wrong I turned out to be.
	I just like to thank you for deradicalizing me as I was on the path that the path I was on already led me to becoming a resentful, weak and jealous person.
	You might not feel like you're making a difference, but you really are, all of you.
	Well, thank you very much, and we're doing our best.
	And I'm glad that you didn't become a resentful, weak, and jealous person.
	Yeah, I hope you're a strong, forward-thinking person now.
	Yeah, and confident, happy.
	We don't want you to become emotionally dependent on others, or a particular ideology.
	Hey Callum, I've got a recipe for making some quality bread for the office, if you're interested.
	Right, bad?
	Let's check that one out.
	Edward of Woodstock.
	So this posturing by the Democrats is rather disgusting.
	Saying that this...
	Yes it is.
	Saying this needs to happen for the country to heal is the most divisive thing they could have done.
	The most unifying would be to conduct an investigation across the aisle into Trump's claims.
	That's correct.
	This is a demonstration to any other non-political pleb from ever daring to rise to the top office.
	That's correct.
	That place is sacred and only belongs to the patrician political elite, don't you know?
	That's a very good comment, Edward.
	Just read something in the chat that tickled me.
	Drink the thick milk, bigot.
	LAUGHTER You're not a transphobe, are you?
	Because it does actually also fit in with the idea, because I saw someone posting on Twitter, if a heterosexual man doesn't want to suck, then they're, you know, transphobic.
	And there is actually a funny post that came off 4chan a while, like a long time ago, where someone brought into the idea that it wasn't gay.
	Apparently they called up a prostitute who was transgender.
	And then they had the realisation, when they were six inches down, thinking, actually, this is pretty gay.
	And then they were very angry about it, that they'd been misled.
	It was like, yeah, yeah.
	Drink the thick milk, bigot.
	Andrew Wiley says, Yesterday I sought the opinions of someone who I consider to be intelligent, but on the other side of the debate.
	I asked him to read the Time magazine article, which he did.
	As expected, he dismissed its implications and any evidence which I encouraged him to investigate.
	Yeah, I did the same with, you know, left-wing friends I'm friends with.
	And they also said there's nothing to this.
	And PSA Sitch, Adam Friended did the same with Sitch, and Sitch was like, there's nothing here.
	I was like, what are you talking about?
	Like, they're just saying, hey, we're a cabal who engaged in a conspiracy, and we want you to know, because we want to be famous.
	I was like, okay...
	Our discussion was civil with no issues.
	However, it was his closing statement that actually disturbed me, which usually takes a lot to do.
	He said, They can't even impeach a coup without tripping over their own dick.
	How does someone even respond to this level of tribalism?
	I'm shocked and a bit demoralized.
	Um...
	I don't know.
	I mean, it seems that your friend would like it if the Democrats rigged the elections.
	So when you present an article where the Democrats claim that they rigged the election, they're like, oh good, I can sleep soundly at night.
	SirApple says, Hey Carl, I've been watching your content for over five years and I can't thank you enough for saving me from becoming a far left like my parents.
	Oh, well, I'm really helping a lot of people out today.
	Thanks.
	Sorry about your parents.
	They genuinely believe things like the Times article, CRT and the 1619 Project and the media censorship are perfectly legitimate and ethical and refuse to accept any evidence or argument to the contrary.
	Honestly, I feel that leftists will never see reason or compromise and that something like secession is inevitable.
	Well, I can't speculate on whether a secession is going to happen.
	But they are difficult to get through to, aren't they?
	Chris Wolf says, walking away from the Dermocrats was enough for my family to tell me that I am easily manipulated.
	The rest of the family is SJW.
	It made me seriously think for months about the nature of manipulation and how to recognise it.
	At this point, it seems that manipulation requires knowledge of events.
	So for someone to manipulate me, they have to understand the nature of the situation to a degree that I become a chess piece.
	With modern internet echo chambers, are we co-manipulating each other to convince ourselves of our chosen realities?
	That's a good question.
	That's actually quite well thought out.
	I think I'm going to have to ruminate on this for a while, because the last thing I think of myself as doing is manipulating anyone.
	I think that we're just presenting things that we see as honestly as we see them.
	We link all of our sources, so you can go read them and check them for yourselves.
	If you feel that we've misinterpreted them in some way, leave a comment, let us know.
	We read them out, obviously.
	So I think that we are being as transparent as we can be, and direct as we can be.
	I mean, I don't think we ever try to make you think something we don't think is true.
	You know, take a propaganda outlet that by their definition are, you know, like free newspapers are made for propaganda.
	Sky News is made for propaganda.
	We try not to be there.
	You see the practices they're up to.
	We try and avoid those at all costs because we know they're bad.
	Yeah.
	And you know where our money comes from because it comes from you, which is you subscribing at lotacies.com.
	Keeps us all, you know, fed and clothed and watered and with the lights on.
	So...
	If we're manipulating anyone, then we're not aware of it.
	Edward of Woodstock, I believe the burger rating doesn't work like that.
	Oh god, I've got an expert now.
	It's not the quantity of the burgers, but the content.
	The worst is a nothing burger, just the bun.
	Mediocre should be like a cheeseburger, and the best should be something like a quarter pound bacon burger with extra cheese.
	Yeah, but what if the cheese is runny spray on cheese?
	That's trans rights cheese.
	Figured out what it's made of now.
	Are you saying there's an essential component to cheese?
	Yes.
	I think I am.
	You transphobe.
	The obviously sane people would like a word with you.
	I'm kind of embarrassed.
	Kenneth Scott says, I'm kind of embarrassed that the French, of all people, are refuting American wokeism.
	At least the Franks are realising.
	Yeah, I know.
	I know.
	It's embarrassing that we're way behind.
	As an American, my apologies for the intellectual vomit coming out of our left-wing universities.
	We owe the UK 1,000 cases of ale.
	Yep, you do.
	Keep up the good work, gents.
	Whole family has joined Lotus Eats as premium members.
	Oh, thanks.
	I start work every day with your site.
	May you grow, conquer our shores, and slay CNN slash MSNBC. In a video game, obviously.
	Thank you, Christian.
	Brian Hack says, hating the French is an American tradition, okay?
	If they stopped being Karens when the Germans were preparing to invade them twice, they would have averted both world wars.
	At least now they have stopped being Karens, it appears, sheesh, maybe we'll avoid World War III. Yeah, I find it really amusing that the Americans have got this kind of, I don't know, inbuilt hatred of the French.
	Because, like, the French are the reason that the Americans are a republic.
	Yeah, but the embarrassment of World War II, they're never going to get over.
	Yeah, but it really didn't take very long either.
	Like, the French were like, yeah, great, you've had your revolution, come and help us with ours.
	And a load of the American revolutionaries came over to France and basically ended up hating the French.
	And we're like, no, you're insufferable.
	And you're doing all this wrong.
	This is terrible.
	We're leaving.
	There we go.
	End of the Franco-American alliance right there.
	On the transbirth issue, the logical end point is that giving birth itself is transphobic and therefore should be banned.
	Keep up the great stream, guys.
	Keep up the good work.
	Nine out of ten burgers.
	Oh, thank you.
	That's good to know.
	And some superchats.
	If you think the new atheists debunked Christianity or there are no historical scientific arguments of Christianity, you're living in an atheist bubble.
	Oh, God.
	Okay, Gareth, that's not what I was trying to say.
	What I was trying to say is, culturally, the new atheists did a great deal of damage to Christianity as a kind of public philosophy.
	I'm not saying that Christianity is wrong or anything like this.
	What I'm saying is this was just the tide.
	You could see the tide moving.
	And Gareth, again, I learned about cancel culture decades before you did when pro-intelligent design scientists got cancelled for challenging the Darwinist establishment.
	When I say cancelled, I mean their careers were destroyed and Richard Dawkins led the charge.
	I'm not aware of that.
	I didn't know that cancel culture existed there.
	Depends on your definition of cancel culture, I suppose.
	But I mean, if they, you know, made him lose his job, took down any of his, like, you know, public-facing things, you can call that cancel culture.
	I think it's fair.
	I don't know.
	It's difficult in the domain of pure science, because then it's like, well, what do you do when someone's selling a...
	Let's just assume whatever it is.
	It's completely false.
	Mm-hmm.
	I mean, at the end of the day...
	Like, I don't want to go after their family or anything.
	I think, yeah, that could definitely be described as cancer cancer.
	Yeah, yeah, of course.
	But saying, no, you are wrong, here's the evidence, and an institution saying, we're not going to hire you as our chemistry teacher.
	JK Cougar says, thank you guys for being so punctual, unlike Steven Crowder, who is always late.
	Joke, love him too, but for real, love listening to you guys every morning.
	Keep it up.
	Thank you.
	And we'll do a few more since we've actually got a little bit of time.
	What?
	I can't say it on stream.
	Someone said something in chat that's amazing and I can't say it on stream.
	Oh, what?
	Okay, well make sure you tell me afterwards.
	Base Bulgarian says, Iran says, Koof gives you big...
	Yeah, they did.
	Yeah, they did.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	That was also...
	Who else said that?
	It wasn't just Iran who said that.
	There was some...
	There was some, like, radical...
	Oh, it was a Jewish rabbi or something.
	Also said the koof makes you gay.
	Oh, they finally found something to agree on, I guess.
	Oh, the koof vaccination, yeah.
	Yeah, it's weird.
	Not our opinion.
	Yeah, not our opinion.
	We disavow.
	We think the koof vaccination makes you straight.
	Check Jerusalem Post.
	YouTube won't let me send links in Superchats.
	Baseball going again.
	Racism problems simplifies society.
	This racial group of people has been treated like dogs for years.
	What should we do?
	SJWs?
	Throw them a bone.
	Shadow Rodney.
	Had a debate with a social centrist friend.
	My conclusion?
	Socialists want government for the people and fear private elitists.
	Capitalists want a private market for the people and fear big government elites.
	Class issue.
	Yeah, there's definitely a great deal of class issues stitched up in, frankly, just enlightenment politics.
	Like, all forms of enlightenment politics are broadly based on class.
	Yes, basically.
	Zerg says, That is actually terrifying.
	Thank you for the updates from Perth, by the way.
	And, I mean, things aren't exactly better here.
	Like, people keep getting arrested because they drove their car somewhere.
	It's like, yeah, but you drove a car.
	Bull milk is keto-friendly.
	I am not going to test that.
	This is where your ketoism will lead you, boy.
	It's fine.
	Almond milk is keto-friendly, and there are no transphobic issues with it, so I'm going to stick with my almond milk.
	But yeah, there are people in the UK getting arrested for driving.
	Oh, they drove 100 miles.
	It's like, okay, but they're in a car.
	Like, they didn't speak to anyone.
	What's the problem?
	King Edward Longshanks, what was the biggest sham?
	Charles I's treason trial or Trump's impeachment?
	Well, since it's politically relevant, I'm going to say Charles I. Trump's impeachment, obviously, I would say.
	There is clearly nothing to this.
	UP Schutt says, just to make sure the Democrats should impeach everyone who doesn't swear on the Communist Manifesto.
	Greetings from Angela Country.
	Yes, hello.
	I hope things are going well in Germany.
	Everything's falling apart everywhere else.
	Michelle Obama again.
	Oh, it's nice to hear from the First Lady again, with her Australian dollars.
	Now that the Democrats have come clean on how they conspired to prevent Trump from being re-elected, I think Hillary Clinton should just come clean on how she conspired to have Jeffrey Epstein killed.
	I'm surprised that she hasn't, to be honest.
	I'm surprised no one's claimed the death of Jeffrey Epstein.
	Because, I mean, there is a part of me that thinks, well, that is, you know, the internet is going to lord you as a hero for killing this pedo sex trafficker.
	Just what about your husband, I guess.
	I guess so.
	Wolfgang Deo.
	Here's a 3R. Since a while ago I gave a fiver, YouTube better gout from the money they stole from this.
	Tax the government with UBI bloody hell.
	Thank you.
	Angry Baneling says, Hey Carl, hope you and the family are doing well.
	Yeah, they're doing okay, as lockdowns go.
	Wednesday, Tim Pool and Sargon stream.
	Heard it about a while ago.
	Is it not happening anymore?
	Well, I was going to go out to America and go on his podcast, and then the UK government was like, verboten.
	Is there someone you forgot?
	Yeah, is there someone I forgot to ask?
	God, there is.
	We're not allowed to...
	We're still in lockdown.
	We can't go in and do anything.
	And see Mac Hancock's.
	If you lie about where you've gone, you're going to get 10 years in prison.
	Yeah.
	Like, child molesters get seven years.
	You get raped in the UK as seven years.
	Yeah.
	Like, unreal.
	For lying about where I've been on holiday to the government.
	Doing ten years for going to Portugal, lads.
	Hancock is such a freak, I can't stand it.
	Anyway, Earl of Longford.
	Would prefer to watch on loads of sight, but vid keeps stopping.
	Press the EU blockading vaccine from Northern Ireland in breach of the Good Friday.
	All here are against.
	Well, that's good to know.
	Everyone is at least against what the EU is doing.
	Fake news media is the enemy of the people.
	That's true, Jesus Christ Christ.
	Spitting facts.
	Yeah, true facts.
	The engaged few.
	After reading the Democrats' impeachment memo, they're fortifying Congress's constitutional power to impeach by saying constitutional protections don't apply because orange man bad.
	It's not a star chamber.
	It's not a star chamber.
	It's a Volksgericht.
	I mean, it sounds pretty star-chamber-ish to me, to be honest.
	I'm not sure what a Volksgericht is.
	People's Court?
	I don't know.
	Yeah, it's going to be something the Nazis did, obviously.
	Student of History says...
	Anything the Germans ever do, yes, but basically them.
	Does it tingle against your morals and Englishman's liberal value to admit the frogs have a point?
	Yes.
	There's deeper ancestral, like, visions flashing across my mind of...
	Longbows.
	Also, the establishment is Jesusing Trump, dragging him through the street to show everyone what happens when you speak out.
	Yeah, I mean, I'm actually waiting for them to metaphorically put him on a cross.
	An effigy of Trump is going to get actually crucified.
	Riduculous says, don't fire Callum, Callum Sims Unite.
	Big food in the US is very deceptive and only cares about profit.
	Facebook recommend book Fast Food Nation as a primer.
	I gave it two out of four burgers.
	No, I can't fire Callum because Callum's the person who tells me the legal conditions upon which I can fire people.
	I actually do.
	Yeah.
	Reminds me of that Simpsons episode where Burns has his lawyer look over whether or not he can shoot his lawyer.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Like, I unironically don't know.
	Gareth Green.
	Hey, I like QAnon's Shaman.
	If you're interested, he has a Rumble channel.
	Yeah, I mean, I don't know anything about QAnon's Shaman and I find him to be an amusing accessory to the events that have gone on.
	But every day there's, like, a new article published about QAnon's Shaman.
	It's like, he's not a celebrity.
	It's like...
	He's not anyone important.
	I don't know why the media keeps talking about him.
	Well, I do know why.
	It's because he looks interesting.
	I was right.
	Volksgericht is People's Court.
	Apparently they were set up by the German Nazi regime to just legitimize illegal things they were doing.
	What a shock.
	Galacta Watkins.
	What's her, chaps?
	Last soup chat as I'm getting bronze tonight.
	Oh, thank you, sir.
	Been watching since 2014.
	Love the guys and gals working at Lotus Theatre's Pax Britannica.
	Yeah, don't forget to go on Reddit and Gab because Ranveer is doing a great work with the social media and he's not getting any love.
	Like, no one's simping for Ranveer and that's not on, I think.
	He needs some simps.
	Hell Radio.
	Well, I was trying to end simping, John, but what can you do?
	The people want what the people want.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's not your position now.
	Well, it's capitalism, isn't it?
	Hell Radio lives.
	The kangaroo court from yesterday was a prime example to the public of the unity that they intend on throttling the US with.
	Oh yeah, unity means submission to the Democrats, and the left generally, to be honest.
	Student of history, did France just become England's wall?
	Kind of.
	Yeah, in a way.
	CLC says this is the fear seen from the totalitarian left so often.
	Game power by deceiving the people.
	Fear the day the jig is up.
	Disarm and oppress the people.
	Yeah, that's exactly it.
	They know that what they're doing is not really legit and can't really stand up to scrutiny and therefore...
	Well, I mean, that's only because if Le Pen's criticisms of leftism are anything like Macron and his cabinet's criticisms, then...
	But there's the realpolitik for a second.
	You need that force to keep it driving in that direction.
	So, I don't know if we have any French bros watching, but if you want that to continue, I'd say Le Pen is your best bet.
	Well, I mean, I don't know enough, so let us know.
	Leave a comment.
	But it's the problem with the UK politics.
	We don't have an opposition to the Conservatives that can drag them to the right, whereas the Labour Party has endless dragging, so the Conservatives end up getting dragged with them.
	I mean, remember, in the last election, the Communist Party of Britain said, we're not going to stand any MPs to vote Labour.
	Gareth Green says, when I was a kid, Kenneth Branagh's Henry V gave me the impression that God wanted England to annex France, and I advocated that for years.
	What do you mean, gave you the...
	He does.
	If you think about the new atheist debunked Christianity...
	Oh, we read that one.
	Yeah, no, I'm...
	I don't want to go there again.
	The gay rascal.
	Whatever is tearing France apart, it would better be fast so I can get to Calais for the Queen's 95th birthday.
	What better present for the English monarch?
	Yes.
	Did you miss one there?
	Oh, did we miss one?
	Go down a bit.
	30 bucks?
	There.
	We read that one already.
	Oh, sorry.
	Zoranix says, we should never forget that Charles Fourier, 1837, coined feminism and he was a French philosopher.
	Yeah, I mean, David Starkey was right.
	All bad ideas come out of France and the French should take responsibility for those.
	Like having an alliance with Scotland.
	Robert Connor, the French are going to save civilisation.
	Can 2021 get any stranger?
	No.
	Well, I mean, I say no, but who knows what's going to happen tomorrow?
	Anthony Willis.
	If you're in need of Reddit moderators, happy to help Dr.
	Argumental.
	Yeah, we'll send it across to Ranveer and hopefully he can help out.
	Alex Masters.
	Since the Anglos ruled the world, French copied by claiming moral and cultural superiority.
	This seems to have inoculated them against wokeism.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, they have a very much a French, France must remain French vibe about them as well, because they're very upset that the world's becoming more and more Anglo.
	Yeah, because we won and they lost.
	But I think it helps them in this regard.
	They're able to identify a foreign nonsense and say this is foreign nonsense.
	Well, it's all about playing the victim.
	We're not allowed to play the victim because we won.
	And they're allowed to play the victim because they lost, which is why the French are perennial victims of English aggression.
	Aggression?
	Well, we defended ourselves to victory.
	English justice.
	Yeah, justice.
	Yeah, that's a good point.
	Gman makes a very good point here.
	Carl, please stop ranking things on a 0 to 10 burger scale.
	Americans don't use the metric burger system.
	That's a great point.
	It's a 1 to 12 burger scale.
	Yeah, it's a 1 to 12.
	Yeah, okay, fine.
	Okay.
	I accept that correction.
	DRT is king.
	France brings back a king.
	They will take the most based country in Europe crown from Eastern Europe.
	I don't want to give them too much credit.
	Brazer says, Yeah, absolutely.
	There's no question that not just Europe, but most of the pre-modern world was based on ethnicity.
	There's a little bit of a problem there.
	The HRE does encompass non-German people.
	It's kingdom-based, so it's not a perfect example.
	But the German revolution to get the Germans into a unified state is a good example.
	I think the Polish is actually better, though.
	Democrats.
	Election fraud is a conspiracy theory.
	Also Democrats.
	So anyway, this is how we conspired.
	Yeah.
	This is the thing.
	I was talking to Don the Pleb yesterday.
	It's like, look...
	If they are just so secure that they can come out and produce an article like this and nothing happens, then...
	I mean, I don't know.
	FemT66 says, I almost spit my coffee out at a Costa.
	One triumph advisor told you.
	Right.
	We can see the sock puppet on the other hand, Jim.
	Yeah, I just love the totally unprofessional terms.
	Oh, he'll be effed.
	Will he, Jim?
	Will he?
	He'll be effed, will he?
	Very, very professional.
	Red Lighting.
	Go France!
	Quite a few Muslims are only second to leftists in mental gymnastics.
	Being mixed with Frankfurt School leftist American ideology is horrible.
	Yes.
	Distance says we can now quote Carla saying thank God for the French.
	Yeah, I know.
	I never saw it coming either.
	Gareth Green, there's no such thing as French ethnicity.
	It's a hodgepodge of Celtic Gauls and Germanic Franks.
	They historically did not speak the same language.
	When do we get Occitan nationalism?
	Yeah, the constitution of French ethnicities is something worth discussing.
	But there was something called French that existed in an area around Paris.
	I know that the language point is definitely true.
	There's some complexity here in regards to France especially, but there is an ethnic group you can describe there, especially when you get to the point of the nation state of France instead of the kingdom.
	Yeah, there is.
	It's quite a complicated thing.
	And it was actually fairly recent as well.
	It was like 19th century nationalism.
	That made French like the proper language of France.
	Before then it was really quite all over the place.
	This is like your conservatism part where you wouldn't need a conservative argument for monarchism.
	You don't really need an argument for ethnic groups making up a country until you have 19th century nationalism.
	Yeah, or not even that, 21st century radical leftism.
	No, because we're talking about, like, why does Poland get to argue it's a nation-state in the 19th century?
	Yeah, but you didn't have wokeism that was trying to imply that any kind of ethnic liberation was in and of itself white supremacy, right?
	Okay, yeah, I was just talking about the idea of exo-states in the sense that this ethnic group deserves a state because they're an ethnic group.
	Yeah.
	I mean, most revolutions throughout history were against empires on behalf of ethnic groups, saying, we want autonomy.
	Anyway, Charles...
	Oh, Fuzzy Toaster says, Modern Agincourt when?
	I suppose we won't be stringing up longbows, but we'll still be calling them garlic-munching, frog-eating, snail-slurpers.
	Well, that we can do for free.
	Charles Lewis, Jupiter just became my favourite planet, base Jupiter, by CTRM, dogecoin to the moon.
	It's not financial advice.
	It's not financial advice, no.
	Gold818 says, sure, college leftism in America, but really it comes from Soviet infiltration of the American education system.
	Just Cold War holdover.
	There's doubt there's going to be some strands of that that weave together with the French intellectuals, which weave together with conservative weakness in philosophy and produced this cancerous monster that's taking over the world.
	Fuzzy Toaster, thanks very much.
	Can you scroll up a bit, John, please?
	And we'll do a couple more and then we're going to have to go, I'm afraid.
	Where was I? William Younger?
	American Ideas?
	Where was Derrida from again?
	Yes, exactly.
	The French can run from this all they want, but every single name we're going to pull out of the hat on the road to this is going to be a Frenchman.
	Or a Frenchwoman.
	Have you ever read anything by Simone de Beauvoir?
	You think I read French?
	No, of course not.
	But yeah, it's like the way that they discuss gender is very dehumanizing, I would say.
	Goat.
	One of the reasons the French are trying to put the origin of the ideology on someone else is that being non-French is their strongest popular argument.
	Yeah, it is.
	Especially if they can call it Anglo-Saxon.
	It's the English, right?
	Okay, of course it is.
	Student of History.
	Tiddy Juice.
	That's transphobic.
	Jonah175.
	Let's just all agree to call it the milk of human kindness.
	That's probably transphobic as well, to be honest.
	Longshanks.
	France goes base.
	It doesn't sound like cow milk, but that sounds like the other kind of milk.
	Which is also transphobic.
	Well, as an Englishman, you should be actually quite thrilled to watch the old alliance fall apart like this.
	Who's stopping us now?
	Yesterday you said you do not understand the metric system.
	One kilogram bag of sugar.
	So if you're 90 kilograms, you're 90 bags of sugar.
	Simple.
	What?
	Did you say you don't understand metric?
	I don't recall saying that.
	But anyway.
	Maybe we were talking about the burger system.
	Jack Zeppo, even.
	Mark my words, a woman as an adult human male will become the new marriage as the union between man and woman for Cathedral.
	I think you mean adult human female.
	But yes, yes.
	That's the way you're going to be distinguishing between clearly sane people and normal people.
	M says, Hey, thanks for making my lunchtimes fun.
	Carl, both you and your wife have chests.
	So which one of you does the chest feeding?
	I'm confused.
	God, it sounds so horrible in a sentence.
	Which one of you does the chest feeding?
	It's very dehumanising.
	Do we have one above that, John?
	It just sounds gross.
	Chest feeding.
	Sounds like a Family Guy thing, where Pete Griffin starts feeding Stewie Griffin.
	Yes.
	Convincing Reality says, Yeah, we were right.
	But the question is, do you think there's something essentially biological about a human being giving birth?
	Because if you do, you might be a bigot.
	Also, whatever hospital you work in for the NHS, you guys will have a diversity manager.
	And the going rate for the highest part of that department is over £100,000 a year.
	Literally like what the Prime Minister gets paid.
	Yeah, I agree.
	Fair criticism.
	I don't know what else to call the progressive groups except progressives.
	I think we should start calling them the clearly sane people.
	Oh look, the clearly sane person has said that actually men can breastfeed.
	I think that the reason I like the term progressive is because in my head, it's already derogatory.
	Like, to be called a progressive is the cringiest thing imaginable.
	It's not good, in my mind.
	But I can see how some people would think it means progress, but...
	I mean, that's what it was historically.
	But anyway, folks, thank you for joining us.
	We'll be back at the same time tomorrow.
	If you want more content from us, you can go to Logistics.com, sign up to become a premium member.
	We've got the really good one, the Where Christopher Hitchens Would Fall in the Culture Wars hint, He wasn't down for all this wokeness, even in his time, which it was present in his time because it came out of academia.

▲