Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 12, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:38

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #87

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
	Welcome to the podcast.
	We were joking about some of the segments that we're going to be doing in a bit.
	So, you know, it's going to be a good show today, I think.
	When we get taken off everything, we'll clip them at some point.
	Yeah, we will.
	Yeah, because this is the content that unfortunately we're not allowed to publish on the internet.
	Anyway...
	Welcome to my show!
	Salinas?
	Salinas?
	I'm sorry, I'm terrible with names, Luna.
	But the article itself is brilliant, right?
	And it's titled, It's Not the Government's Job to Keep You Safe.
	And it's quite a long and well-argued piece that, in fact, maybe the government shouldn't be able to tyrannise you for your own good.
	And, you know, establishing the basic liberal perspective on what a government is for.
	It's really, really good.
	It's on our website at the moment, and I strongly recommend you check it out.
	But we've got a lot to get through today, so let's crack on.
	We're going to begin with a curfew for men, which is probably going to be introduced at some point in Britain.
	Why not?
	Because every other barrier has been broken.
	We're not allowed to have sex with people we don't already live with.
	We're not allowed to buy beer from pubs.
	That was in Wales, wasn't it?
	They're literally forbidden from selling alcohol.
	I mean, we're just under literally COVID sharia at the moment.
	So why not a curfew?
	Inshallah.
	Go for the curfew.
	Yeah.
	God wills it.
	Anyway, so this story starts off with something actually serious and sort of sad, but then it descends into absolute nonsense.
	Sort of sad.
	Yeah, it's sad.
	I mean, in the sense that it's a real story of note, and then the intelligentsia of our society are so stupid that they learn nothing and go in a completely different direction.
	I'm reasonably sure that intelligentsia was meant to be a derogatory term when it was first coined.
	I know it's a Russian term.
	Exactly.
	Yeah, probably.
	Probably proven.
	Anyway, so this is an appeal for a missing woman that was made in Lamb of Police for some lady who was walking home from a friend and then went missing, which she would have been breaking COVID is my understanding, but that's aside the point.
	Right, so we're not going to castigate her for breaking the lockdown rules.
	No, but it is something I find strange that no one's mentioning.
	Like, you would expect them to mention it every other avenue, but for some reason this has now been dropped.
	If it was you breaking the lockdown rules, that would all be talking about.
	Yeah, if it was someone didn't like, they'd bring it up.
	But it isn't relevant to the fact that she's gone missing.
	No.
	But then the women living in the area were apparently warned by the police that this had taken place and therefore women should not go on their own.
	So some of the quotes here.
	Women admitted that they were scared to leave their home as police seeking missing Sarah feared a kidnapper was at large.
	One said cops knocked on her door last night and warned her not to go out alone as they desperately tried to piece together what had happened.
	Another woman aged in her 30s told The Sun...
	I was told to be more careful because I live on my own.
	The police came round yesterday and said I should be careful.
	I don't want to leave the house at the moment.
	You don't know what happened.
	Perfectly reasonable.
	Things are going great in Sadiq Khan's Multicultural London, I can see.
	Yeah, but there's some guy who's kidnapping women.
	One of them's gone missing.
	If you live in this area, I wouldn't go out.
	Seems perfectly prudent to say, well, they're kidnapping women, so...
	Also, you're not allowed to go out, so don't.
	Yeah, there's that, but just, you know, be careful there.
	And then she was seen on some doorbell footage, so they confirmed that she was in the area and then went missing seemingly by kidnap because she was on the way home.
	And then they found someone who is believed to have been the one who abducted her and is suspected of murdering her.
	so this is a met police officer which is the incredible embarrassment here for the police which is one of her own was doing this so she was abducted in south london the officer lives in kent and was arrested in kent uh taken in for questioning on suspected murder and suspected indecent exposure which is a report that the police received a few days before the kidnapping but seemed to have not acted on so there's some questions there about yeah are the police doing their job because this was a police officer
	um the case has been referred to the independent an office for police conduct because it's a police officer, which Yeah.
	And the sad news is that they found her remains, or at least they suspect to be her remains in an area they were searching.
	I don't think it's confirmed yet that it's her remains, but it seems that definitely she's probably been killed.
	Yeah.
	And if it is this police officer, again, still a suspect at the time of recording.
	Right.
	That's pretty bad.
	I mean, this is a pretty bad story.
	A police officer in the Met seems to have abducted a woman and killed her and is now under questioning.
	One of the worst parts about this is he's not just some random copper off the street.
	He's one of the elite parliamentary and diplomatic protection command officers.
	So his main role is protecting diplomatic premises.
	So the Palace of Westminster, Downing Street, areas where you want the best of the best.
	In which case, oh god.
	But we have to be clear that he is a suspect.
	He has not been charged.
	Yeah, but he has been arrested.
	He has been arrested.
	We're not going to say that he's guilty or anything like that.
	Yeah, the police just believe they have evidence enough to arrest him at least.
	There was also a woman who was arrested in the same place on suspicion of aiding and abetting.
	She's out on bail at the moment.
	And I mention that because that seems to have just fallen off the radar completely.
	Everyone's forgotten that a woman was also arrested here.
	And you'll see why in a bit.
	So the leader of the Women and Equality Party issued a statement which the Guardian quoted because, of course, they did.
	Was it something about women need to be held accountable for aiding and abetting the kidnapping of other women?
	No, they said that this case has affected women's rights across the capital and across the country.
	And I was like, what?
	I don't know.
	She then goes on to wind about...
	Hang on, hang on.
	The legal status of women has not changed because of this crime.
	No.
	Like, we didn't decide to actually, well, we're going to avoid it being a crime by making it legal to kidnap women or anything?
	That wasn't...
	You know, she then goes on to whine about other stuff, but she doesn't expand on that comment, so I don't really know, except maybe she's saying that women being killed means that women everywhere somehow lose rights?
	Well, that means anyone being killed loses their rights.
	Yeah, it's pretty silly.
	But the response from this was kind of unexpected for me, but I imagine I probably should have expected it.
	Which is a lot of people upset that a woman has been killed, and therefore this is a women's issue.
	And they've sort of blown it out of proportion, in my view.
	Like, sure, it is bad that someone has been murdered, but it's one person.
	This is not some epidemic that's been going on for months and months.
	And let's just get some of the tweets up so some of the people responding to this.
	So, women and girls are in danger, scared to run, scared to walk.
	If men were scared like this, would something be done?
	This is a damning indictment of Sidi Khan's London.
	Yeah.
	I mean, this is so 2012.
	Okay, go on.
	I know, it's the same argument as the ones about we live in a rape culture society.
	The argument here is we live in a society of murderers who love to murder women, and apparently it's normal and everyone likes that, which is obvious nonsense.
	And this went on and on, so the next one here is from a lady who, what is she, Irish Politics, Oxford or something?
	So her name was Sarah, she deserved to walk home that night.
	It was her right, her name was Sarah.
	Yeah.
	As if there's a constituency of people saying, no, it's not her right.
	Women must be locked to their homes.
	The murderer lobbyist group are like, no.
	I suppose locking in their homes is the COVID lot.
	That's the constituency arguing for that.
	But the murder lobbyist group, I don't think have...
	The Venn diagram of these people and COVID lockdown proponents is quite similar too.
	Yeah.
	So then the next one here.
	I guess it is, Mr.
	Nabil Abdul-Rachid.
	Well, how does that not apply to men?
	Like, it's never safe to walk anywhere.
	Well, men get attacked more often than women.
	That's one of the points, which is the absurdity of all this arguing.
	And then there's more of this.
	So some lady arguing that, you know, every woman has to take different routes.
	You know, a woman that has held keys for self-defense, made fake phone calls, turned a corner and run.
	All women live in fear.
	And it's like...
	No, no, no it's not.
	The reality of this is that it's just a murder, these things happen, it's being investigated, and we'll get the truth.
	But this is not some damning indictment of British society as a society that just loves murdering women for fun.
	It's absurd.
	And the next one here I wanted to show is just probably the best take I've seen, which is that because some men do these things, therefore all men are guilty.
	Because it only takes most men...
	So if we get the archive up, she's deleted this.
	So the problem with telling us that most men aren't dangerous and don't mean to harm us is that, whilst it's true, we have no way of telling which ones do mean to harm us.
	And it only takes one, meaning it falls upon us to be the lookout every day, all the time.
	Yes, you are responsible for your own personal safety, Jennifer.
	That is actually the reality of life.
	But also just the absurdity here.
	It only takes one.
	Well, I replaced that argument with Muslim.
	And then, you know, read that.
	The problem with telling us that most Muslims aren't dangerous and don't mean to harm us is that while it's true, there's no way of telling which ones do want to harm us.
	And it only takes one.
	I mean, you can see the absurdities here.
	Yes.
	There is no way that that statement would be acceptable, and yet, here we are.
	And this stupid narrative is still going on.
	There was another trend today on the trending list.
	I just took a screenshot of the top tweets there.
	You know, tens upon tens of thousands of likes for each one of them.
	And they're all just complaining that, oh, isn't it horrible how murdering women is normalized in British society?
	Fantasy land are you living in?
	Where was this energy when Sarah Champion came out and said, hey, by the way, I think a million English girls have been raped by rape gangs.
	Where was this energy?
	But the point here, murdering women in the UK is illegal, and that law is not just on the books, it is enforced.
	It's been on the books for literally a thousand years.
	Yeah.
	Probably earlier.
	Probably even the Germanic tribes, before they even came to Britain, actually criminalized the murder of women.
	But it's not just a point of like, oh, you have it on the books.
	Like, okay, there are laws on the books in Italy, but they're not enforced.
	We take the whole murdering women situation quite seriously.
	It's not just a paper law, it is enforced.
	And as you can see by these tens of thousands of likes and whatnot, it's got mass social support that murdering women bad.
	I don't know what to tell you.
	That's just obviously false.
	Idiots.
	Are just talking like this.
	And it's also just false.
	As you mentioned, the narrative that women have some horrible disposition of being killed en masse.
	There's some research on this, and the research, if you can get the next one, is that men are more likely to be attacked by strangers than women.
	Because most of actual murders and whatnot come from people you know.
	They don't come from random strangers.
	But in those situations that people hold their keys while they're walking down a dark alleyway or whatnot because they're afraid of a stranger, apparently it's mostly men who get attacked there.
	This has been known for a long time.
	So, also just based on BS. Absolute BS. But the response from this is perfectly normal, which is to suggest that there should be a curfew on men.
	So I saw Nigel Farage posting there.
	But we'll play the clip.
	This is a Green Party lord arguing in response to the police, saying that you should be safe and take precautions.
	And she's upset about this, so she proposes a curfew on men in response.
	Let's play.
	And in the week that the woman, Sarah Everard, was abducted and we suppose killed because remains had been found in a woodland in Kent, I would argue that at the next opportunity for any bill that's appropriate, I might actually put in an amendment to create a curfew for men on the streets after 6pm, which I feel would make women a lot safer.
	And discrimination of all kinds would be lessened.
	Okay.
	A curfew on men would lower discrimination.
	Yeah, I mean, A, okay, yeah, I'm for it.
	Let's have a curfew on men.
	Trans men as well.
	They're men, remember.
	You don't get to escape.
	So now trans men, with the rest of us men, are confined to our houses after 6pm, uh, It's probably going to cut down the amount of grooming that goes on, which will help, you know.
	And as she said, the direct causal link will be less discrimination against vulnerable English girls.
	So, you know, I mean, she's not wrong.
	I mean, men do commit most of the crime.
	Yeah, kind of a based and UKIP-pilled position from the Green Party.
	I mean, if you're happy to do that on the basis of sex, well, why can't you expand it to ethnic groups, give it to religious groups, and what's your limiting principle?
	Yeah, let's just start putting in arbitrary curfews for random...
	Groups.
	She's obviously being a bit tongue-in-cheek.
	I hope so, but she's a Green Party lord.
	Who knows?
	Yeah, but she was sort of like, you're proposing that women should take care.
	That's absurd for some reason.
	And therefore, imagine if I said that all men must be confined to their homes.
	How silly would that be?
	And Nigel Farage taking this seriously, posting it.
	And a lot of people mocked Nigel for this because it's like, oh, come on.
	This is somewhat taken out of context.
	She's being tongue-in-cheek.
	But apparently not, which is the horrible bit.
	So if we go to the next one, this is Jeremy Vine taking this seriously.
	This isn't a joke.
	He was saying that she's being very serious and whatnot.
	And if you scroll down, he's referencing another case in which he's sort of promoting the idea that actually this would cut down on crime.
	What's wrong with you?
	Why would you come to this conclusion?
	How many of these crimes happen?
	Not many.
	In terms of the UK, we're doing pretty good on this.
	So it's not just people, randos on Twitter.
	An interview was taking place between BBC and the First Minister of Wales, so the leader of the Welsh Government Labour Party.
	Mark Drakeford.
	And he was asked, well, what would you do about this idea of curfewing men?
	And he couldn't find a way to argue against it.
	So let's play the clip.
	That there should be a curfew on men for a period of time.
	Is that something that you would consider?
	It wouldn't be on the top of the list of things that we would consider because it would be, at the very best, a temporary intervention.
	I'm sorry, to be clear, you say it's not the top of your list.
	I can only take it from that, that you could not rule out that being potentially something that you would do.
	If there were a crisis and you needed to take dramatic action that allowed that crisis to be drawn down, then of course you'd be prepared to consider all measures that would make a difference.
	But the sort of measure, the curfew measure that you've described, it could only ever be a temporary answer, and therefore it's not at the top of our list.
	There are other things that we can do and should do, and we'll work hard with our...
	Third sector organisations or local authorities in Wales.
	As I say, people need to be safe and to feel safe.
	And that's absolutely the sort of society we wish to create here in Wales.
	What an absolute psychopath.
	What an absolute lunatic.
	Mark Drakeford, the Führer of Wales...
	This is the guy in charge of the Welsh Government, apparently.
	Well, look, we just need to put a curfew on Jews, okay, if it's in a crisis.
	It's not our top thing, and it would only have to be temporary because it'd be quite strict, but, you know, we'd consider it a fucking Nazi.
	Like, this is obviously in odds with the Equality Act, the fact that sex is on there, and, of course, religion and race, so imagine doing the same.
	But I could see an argument if you say that there is a unique issue between Munger society, therefore I'm going to argue for racial profiling.
	Like, I can see that argument.
	I just don't agree that that's the right thing for the government to do.
	No.
	I don't think that's acceptable.
	But I look forward to him arguing that we're going to start implementing Muslim curfews in response to grooming gangs.
	I'm sure he'll have exactly the same opinion there.
	But, no, of course not.
	God damn it, man.
	So, the response then got even more frantic.
	Again, a woman was arrested in conjunction with this man for aiding and abetting, which is where this story came from.
	Men are the ones responsible.
	But, you know, all men are responsible, which, interesting argument.
	So Jess Phillips, the wonderful Labour MP that even the Labour Party don't like.
	Like, what did she get in the leadership, though?
	It was like 2% or something.
	Something like that, yeah.
	And then she dropped out.
	So she is saying in the Parliament that society has just accepted dead women.
	Evidence for this being that a woman has been killed.
	That's it.
	Like, not anything else.
	Hang on, Jess.
	Jess, I don't accept that a woman is dead here.
	I believe that she's actually still alive.
	Now what?
	Society...
	What are we supposed to do?
	Like...
	Oh, God.
	Okay, Karen.
	Yeah, it's just stupid.
	But just by the numbers you mentioned earlier, like the United Kingdom, let's just take this for a measurement here.
	So it's got the Wikipedia link.
	This is just a list of countries by homicide rate.
	If you just control F, like United Kingdom or whatever, if you can do this in your own time, you can see the United Kingdom is 185th out of 230 countries, so right near the bottom.
	So an incredibly safe place to live by international standards.
	So we don't seem to accept homicide as normal.
	I don't think that the rest of them are meant to be women because they're obviously not.
	We're the normalized homicide activists.
	Death to women.
	That's the chant, I guess.
	And of course, the problem here is we're actually not looking at anything important here.
	We're looking at, yeah, a woman has died and that's sad, but we're not looking at a systemic issue of women being killed en masse or something like this.
	No, it appears to be two lunatics who decided they wanted to murder someone for some reason.
	Yeah, and we'll ignore all the problems that could be said to have been disproportionate in society.
	And I just wanted to bring this back up, because every time I can, I want to bring it back up.
	So this is The Guardian talking about the fact that the killings of black people in England and Wales are the highest since 2002.
	Oh, yeah, but by who?
	Very misleading headline.
	About 15% of all victims in this period were black, but only 3% of the general population are black.
	But also, approximately 1 in 5, or 21% of the suspects, are also black.
	So, 3% of the population, 21% of the murderers.
	Yeah, but not just that.
	It makes it sound like the white people in England are just murdering black people or something.
	That's not what's happening, and everyone knows that's not what's happening.
	Black people are disproportionately victims of murder and also the murderers.
	They are murdering each other.
	And they happen to be living in the same communities that we call the black community.
	Yeah.
	And the most common cause of murder is someone who knows the other person.
	Oh my god, it's all coming together now.
	It's white people's fault.
	The best part here being that you can localise this to London, for example, just to look at it.
	So let's go to Sky News.
	And Sky News, being the eternal, I don't know, I guess white supremacist that they are, they use literally the phrase...
	Almost half of the murder victims, as well as suspects, were black, despite the ethnic group accounting for only 13% of London's population.
	Oh, Sky News, no!
	You're not allowed to use that language.
	You're not allowed to use the word despite.
	I mean...
	That's the Bowdoin.
	It's a statistic, but I guess I look forward to Hope Not Hate demanding that Sky News are some kind of white supremacist organisation for quoting it.
	But it gets to the sole point here, which is, well, that's something that's incredibly disproportionate.
	But are we going to talk about it?
	Are we going to have a discussion in Parliament?
	No, because one woman has died in sad circumstances, but that's enough.
	That's the story that takes the country by storm.
	And the propaganda for Jess Phillips here is embarrassing.
	So this is Politics Joe, which is a Labour outlet disguising itself as just some media point.
	And you can see her MPs are stunned into silence as Jess Phillips spends over four minutes reading the name of every woman killed in the UK over the last year where a man has been convicted or charged as a main perpetrator.
	As if there's some gender war going on?
	I mean, there is from her point of view.
	Like, we're in some kind of class warfare between men and women where the class of men are desperately trying to murder the class of women in the streets or something.
	Well, that's her opinion, yeah.
	I know that's her opinion, but that is crazy.
	Like, no one thinks that that's what's going on except gender communists.
	That's correct.
	So, I don't...
	And the fact that Joe is just like, yes, people are stunned.
	I know, she's not reading out the names of young black men who have been stabbed by other young black men in London...
	Because there's no class more there, in her opinion.
	Exactly.
	And the thing is, that'd probably gone for a lot longer, wouldn't it?
	So there's a point made by the normal people, like actual normal people, if you can get the next one, which is that of the people that are murdered in the last year, 118 women, 577 men.
	Well, then there's clearly a problem here that men are murdering a lot.
	Clearly society has a bias against men, and we've normalized the murdering of men.
	Yeah, and then if you just look at the deaths in society, she's talking about the deaths of women have been normalised.
	Okay, well let's look at workplace deaths for a second, if you can get the graph up.
	This is for the United States, I couldn't find one for the UK, but imagine it's very similar.
	Just the disproportionality there, like it's not even close.
	So, don't give me this BS. And then there's the obviously sane people, who are so obviously sane that they decided that her reading out dead women is transphobic, because she had purposely decided to not include trans women who had also died.
	Correction.
	Jess Phillips only reads out some of the names of women who have been killed in the UK where a man has been convicted.
	If the murdered woman was inconvenient for Jess's worldview, being white not enough, not cis enough, etc., then that woman doesn't appear on Jess's list.
	The thing is, on Jess's list, I listened to her and there were loads of surnames of non-British extraction that she was reading out, which implies that they have husbands of non-British extraction, which shows that it's not about being white.
	We've got to get a recording of John's jokes at some point.
	Anyway, so let's go to the next one.
	Let's continue.
	This wasn't just a small thing I saw.
	Stop congratulating yourself, Jess Phillips, because you get the list you read out of murdered women from someone who deliberately excludes trans women and you've been told and you don't care.
	That's right, Jess.
	You are a TERF. You are now a transphobe.
	You trying to defend women excludes and marginalizes trans people.
	And there is actually some truth to this.
	So she did actually seemingly exclude someone.
	What a bigot!
	So they go to the next one.
	So people claiming that she had deliberately excluded people.
	Oof.
	And this was countered by leftists who support Jess for God knows what reason, saying that fact check, let's go to the next one, fact check, happily there were no murdered trans women in the UK in the last 12 months.
	And then you had...
	The Eternal Lady, who just keeps popping up and defending anything stupid, so let's get the next one.
	Ash Sarkar.
	We're all in the same grim sisterhood of being made afraid of violent men in response to criticisms that she'd excluded trans women at this.
	It's just so cringe.
	I don't know why she does this.
	I think it's amazing.
	I think it's amazing.
	No, no, no.
	You're absolutely right, Ash.
	You're absolutely right.
	The big hairy knuckled sister in the toilets with you, she's in the same boat as you.
	Men are going to victimize her just as much as they would you.
	That's just...
	It's reality.
	It's just life.
	Have a bit of class solidarity, would you?
	So the truth is that, yes, there was actually someone who was murdered.
	So the next link is someone mentioning them.
	So Martin Sabrini, a 55-year-old man, had just been sentenced today for murdering Amy Griffiths, a transgender woman from Troitwitch who was murdered in a bruise of a violent death.
	And yeah, yeah, she was.
	So I went to the source on this.
	So just the Guardian link talking about this.
	They obviously have to frame this as if it's some kind of transphobic attack.
	You know, convicted robber jailed for murdering women he'd met on dating site.
	As if it's like, you know, he turned up and then, oh no, you're transgender, kill them.
	That's not what happened.
	Complete bull.
	I don't know why they don't make that more clear.
	What happened?
	So a convicted armed robber who strangled, battered, and stabbed a woman to death after meeting her on a dating site has been sentenced to life in prison.
	He was on the run for stabbing a woman in the neck outside a supermarket near his home.
	So, three days earlier, he stabbed someone in the neck and then went and met this woman.
	Saberi attacked 51-year-old Griffith with a baseball bat, strangled her and stabbed her, and then he handed himself into the police a little while later.
	He also stole her laptop and Xbox from her house.
	But...
	Brand and Saberi...
	Sorry...
	Sabrina and Griffiths have met online on a transgender dating site and had met in person once before, in June 2018.
	They had exchanged numerous messages over a period of months that showed an affectionate relationship.
	And the judge even notices in this case that there's no way this is a transphobic attack.
	If anything, this guy seems to have been into that sort of thing.
	Yeah, and I love how the Guardians have to mislead you with their headlines endlessly.
	But that is someone that is transgender, was murdered by a man, and Jess Phillips did exclude.
	So trans activists actually correct on this one.
	She seems to have excluded the trans women there on purpose, or whoever made that list.
	Jess, how could you?
	We're very disappointed.
	We use the correct pronouns here, and you should too.
	But yeah, we're going for the male curfew in response to the perfectly normal thing to do in response to one murder.
	I just, I can't get over how...
	Mark Drakeford, well I'm not ruling it out.
	There's a perfectly reasonable response to this, which is, you know, let's create new kinds of technology, ways to protect people on the streets, or how to deal with a police officer.
	No, but there are things you can say in response to a murder that are normal.
	But we never do in this country.
	There always has to be something extreme identity politics.
	But it's, like, I hate to say it, but as they said, like, you know, 650-odd women a year are murdered, right?
	It's just the number of people in a country of, you know, 70 million or whatever it is, after the census, we find out, like, you're going to get a small percentage of murders, and we're right at the bottom of the list of countries of...
	Number of murders that happen each year.
	So we seem to actually kind of have a handle on the problem.
	And you found one example that fits into a bunch of feminist tropes, and you're like, oh god, this is it.
	Men are the problem.
	Sorry, just bad things happen in reality.
	This is why you should take care of yourself, incidentally.
	But I just can't get over the fascism inherent in that, in which you're saying that, essentially, if society isn't perfectly safe, then we have to change it completely?
	Yeah.
	I mean, a Jew murdered a German.
	We need to do something about those Jews.
	That's the argument.
	That's the argument.
	That's the argument being made here.
	Okay, that's what British politics is, where you can never have any sensible facts.
	It's alright, we'll get back to the Nazism inherent in British politics in a minute.
	Because what I really want to do is go through Don Lemon's woke supremacy.
	Don Lemon did a segment on CNN the other day, which we picked up because he is so hilariously misinformed on every issue.
	But the thing is, I say misinformed as if Don Lemon is an honest actor and is just ignorant of the things that have happened instead of deliberately lying to his audience.
	And so I thought we'd go through a bunch of his clips and just examine them and show everyone exactly how Don Lemon is just full of Let me know when you're ready, John, and we'll get to it.
	But the whole thing, it was like a 10-minute long or 7-minute long segment where it's just falsehood after falsehood after falsehood after Fox News popping up with their video pop-ups, goddammit.
	After falsehood and continually misleading, deliberately misleading.
	And the thing is, through the whole thing, he's got this goddamn smirk on his face because he knows he's lying to people.
	He knows that he can lie to your faces and get away with it.
	He knows.
	He knows that these things aren't true and he knows the answers.
	He's just a liar.
	Right.
	Are we ready to get the first clip?
	Or not?
	President Joe Biden is about to sign a presidency-defining bill.
	The GOP, the party of no, trying to distract and deflect with some really shameful statements about race, like this disgusting claim that Black Lives Matter doesn't like families.
	How is that a disgusting claim about race?
	Black Lives Matter is an activist organization.
	It's not a purely racial organization.
	There are non-black people who support Black Lives Matter.
	But the thing is, they don't seem to care about the black family at all.
	And just to be clear, black families are getting absolutely crushed at the moment.
	In 2015, it turned out that 77% of black births in America were to single mothers, which is unreal if you think about it.
	Nearly four out of five black kids are born to a non-nuclear family household.
	That's insane, right?
	But if that's not bad enough, so you would have thought, I would have thought, anyway, if a movement gave a damn about black The first thing they'd be like, okay, we really need to start putting the Black Family back together.
	But instead, Black Lives Matter hadn't expressed the anti-family message on their goddamn website, right?
	Under the What We Believe section, they say, quote, We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and villages that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.
	Well, I call BS on that.
	I don't see how...
	I mean, maybe, maybe, you know, maybe that's the case.
	Maybe you want it so that literally none of these children know who their fathers are.
	Maybe that's what you're going for.
	This is what their, quote, village is.
	But it doesn't seem to be doing anyone any good.
	And the thing is, when there was a huge backlash to this, going, how?
	Why do you want to disrupt the nuclear family?
	They just deleted the page.
	Because, I mean, what's their argument?
	Like, what are they going to say?
	Well, you know...
	Well, it's a symbol of Western liberalism.
	It is.
	It doesn't help us bring in the socialist utopia.
	It doesn't.
	But that's not a popular message.
	Healthy, happy communities, you know, with strong families, that's bad for Black Lives Matter.
	Which is why, and obviously it's because Black Lives Matter is a communist organisation.
	This follows on from communists viewing the family unit as an oppressive structure, whereas in fact it seems to be essential if you want to have any kind of emotional stability and not turn into some thug who joins a gang and shoots people in the street.
	Just saying.
	And this is not a racial thing either, right?
	This would go for any race, at any time, in any place.
	This is just a young man problem.
	But anyway, so let's see what he says about that.
	Come on.
	Doesn't like the old-fashioned family.
	What does that mean when you're...
	Black Lives Matter was about police brutality and violence and trying to keep family members and loved ones alive.
	Sounds like family values to me.
	Sounds like family values to me too, Don.
	That's right, breaking apart.
	Sorry, the exact words, disrupt the Western nuclear family.
	Sounds like family values to me.
	You're a liar.
	You're a liar and you know you're a liar.
	Goddamn, I hate this man.
	Right, so the next one, let's see what happened to the black family.
	I've had my ancestry done twice.
	It is so hard to even find records.
	That go back even two generations sometimes because what?
	The intentional separation of black families.
	And no records.
	You know why?
	They were considered property.
	Total...
	He can barely stop himself from laughing, right?
	He knows.
	He knows what he's saying is a lie.
	Going back two generations.
	Two generations to what?
	The 70s?
	What the hell is...
	This is such nonsense, right?
	I mean, maybe if we're going back to like the 17th century, when black people were brought across from Africa as slaves, you could be like, yeah, sure, that is where that happened.
	But that didn't happen under slavery or Jim Crow, right?
	In fact...
	This was a study done in 1989 by a guy called Errol Ricketts, a research with the Rockefeller Foundation, and he found that between 1890 and 1950, blacks had a higher marriage rate than whites, according to the U.S. Census.
	And from 1960 to 1985, female-headed families grew from 20% to 43% of all black families.
	And so the rates of marriage for both black and white women were the lowest at the end of the 1800s and peaked in 1950 for blacks and 1960 for whites.
	And according to him, it's dramatically clear that black females married at higher rates than white females of native parentage until 1950.
	The legacy of slavery, according to the data, does not explain the obliteration of marriage that we've seen in the black community for the past 30 years.
	It's clear from the data that observes Ricketts, That 1950 was a watershed year for black families as black female-headed families grew rapidly in concert with blacks becoming more urbanised than whites.
	And of course, what happened in the 60s and 70s?
	The expansion of welfare.
	And Thomas Sowell puts it all down to this.
	This chap's study puts it all down to this.
	It was nothing to do with slavery.
	This was nonsense.
	That slavery had been over for 100 years by this point.
	This was not the consequence of slavery whatsoever.
	Don Lemon is lying.
	Just lying to his audience here.
	And CNN are just...
	Just allow it.
	Just allow it.
	Here's a platform for Don Lemon to lie to millions of people, assuming CNN has millions of people watching, which they probably don't.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Black Republican in the Senate telling Fox News, of course Fox News, that what he calls woke supremacy is as bad as white supremacy.
	Woke supremacy is as bad as white supremacy.
	Do you want to explain who these woke supremacists are?
	Yeah, I do, actually.
	We'll go with AOC, Bernie Sanders, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Anna Presley, any staff of any millennial-run news organization like Vox, BuzzFeed, Slate, whatever, tens of thousands of Black Lives Matter and Antifa rioters over the course of summer, and of course, you as well, Don Lemon.
	Name names.
	Let's go for the next one.
	I haven't seen any woke supremacists.
	I've never seen a woke supremacist lynching anybody.
	Well, we have.
	We've seen this plenty of times.
	I mean, this is just one example where a crowd of Black Lives Matter and anti-fire rioters in 2020 beat a white man unconscious Sunday after dragging him from his truck.
	Video footage of the incident shows the crowd surrounded his truck at around 10.30pm where he crashed into a light pole.
	Then they pulled him out and punched him and forced him to sit in the street as he tried to answer a call from his wife.
	Then one of them kicked him in the back of the head until he was unconscious on the floor.
	We have seen this.
	And then this is just like the one, you know, just one example that I just pulled out of a random search, right?
	I mean, we can always go for the guy in Portland who just shot a Trump supporter in cold blood.
	I mean, or you could take the disabled guy.
	If we're looking especially for woke here, the point is that woke supremacy is white supremacy.
	It's the same goddamn philosophy.
	Yeah.
	So when you see the, what was it, the disabled guy who was picked up by four black people who then beat crap out of him, called him racial slurs.
	A Trump supporter, a white person.
	Yeah.
	And they, like, yeah, knife, and they were stringing it to Facebook.
	And they were doing it on the basis that they were in this perspective of where black, he's white, we're going to deal with him because he's historically an oppressor.
	Yeah.
	And...
	He's just some innocent, disabled white kid.
	Yes, this happens an awful lot, right?
	And then, of course, this just ignores the fact that there have been 20 different deaths, plus, from the George Floyd protests.
	It doesn't matter.
	When have woke supremacists ever lynched anyone?
	Well, I mean, we've got like 20 examples.
	Let's go for the next clip.
	Never saw a woke supremacist denying anybody access to housing or job or education or voting rights.
	Well, we have.
	For example, how Asians were systemically denied higher education, which is what the Justice Department's investigation found about Yale University with regards to Asian American and white applicants.
	So it's not like there haven't been examples of this.
	They did a two-year investigation that concluded that Yale rejects scores of Asian Americans and white applicants each year based on their race whom otherwise it would admit.
	And Yale's race discrimination imposes undue and unlawful penalties on racially disfavored applicants, including Asian American and white applicants.
	So this, bad enough, right?
	So they were sued.
	Hang on, they were sued.
	And Harvard got away with it, even though they shouldn't have done, according to Forbes.
	So we're not talking about some radical far-right, like, white supremacist MRA site or something like this.
	We're talking about Forbes, right?
	And they say there is no question that Asian American students face a disadvantage in gaining admission to Harvard.
	The question is why and whether Harvard is responsible for it.
	The federal judge, Alison Burroughs, wrote, However, the judge held that the plaintiffs could not prove that the lower personal ratings are the result of animus or ill-motivated racial hostility towards Asian Americans by the admission officials, so they got away with it.
	It's like, sorry, what's a reasonable inference here?
	I mean, even if you're not convinced by that and you need something more concrete, I mean, just look at, what was it, CBC, then the BBC, you know, state-funded media.
	Yeah, but I was thinking American.
	I know, but like, it's like, how more of an obvious example does Don Lemon need?
	When they were literally making applicants for jobs say, whites need not apply for this job.
	Yeah.
	I mean, the BBC is currently hiring on a racial basis with non-whites need not apply.
	We have an article on lotuseaters.com, which is just the state funded this sort of thing in the UK. I mean, the civil service being my personal animus, that they have a diversity internship in which they give privileges to non-white people.
	Yeah.
	There was also, you know, they're not denying the voting rights.
	Well, I mean, like, literally in Detroit, they were denying the vote counters to come in and look at the votes.
	So, I mean, if voting rights are infringed by potential fake ballots, maybe you could say that that was the case as well.
	And these are, of course, woke supremacists.
	But anyway, let's go to the next clip.
	Never saw any woke supremacists enslaving anybody.
	Amazing.
	Amazing.
	Slavery happens to have been illegal long before Don Lemon was born.
	And it's not like white people have never been slaves.
	But the thing is, you can watch woke supremacists enslaving white people in a large amount of media these days.
	Apparently there's a new Black Lives Matter-themed program called Cracker, which reverses what happened in American history, depicting white supremacists as slaves and black people as slave owners, who somehow become the morally justified slave owners, I guess, in this alternate universe.
	Weird, isn't it?
	You could always just go down to California, right, where you can find activist groups who literally, like this one called Sicarii 1715, forcing passerbys to bow down before them.
	Black supremacists making white people kiss their feet in apologies for racism.
	And they claim, of course, that blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans are the true descendants of the 12 tribes of Israel because they're obviously sane people.
	Well-known historians.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I don't doubt there would be actual slavery going on, Don, if it wasn't outlawed, just so you know.
	Anyway, let's go to the next one about interracial marriage.
	Never saw any woke supremacist trying to keep people from marrying amongst different races.
	Do you not watch Hollywood reporting?
	Donald Glover got it in the neck because he, a woke supremacist, is marrying or is with a white woman.
	And he got it constantly, constantly, all over Twitter.
	You can't be woke while you're dating a white woman.
	How dare you?
	You're a race traitor, is basically the allegation.
	But that's not the only one.
	This is a person called Shannon Sharp, the next one.
	Shannon Sharp has proven himself to be...
	You can go to the next one, John.
	He's proven himself to be a pretty woke individual, regularly discussing race and social injustice as they relate to mainstream sports on Fox and whatever.
	He's been a vocal supporter of Colin Kaepernick, blah blah blah.
	twitter user cynthia g who's a is an insane sjw has a youtube channel uh called out sharp and lavar ball for dating and marrying white women while still receiving praise from the black community suggesting that black women who date outside their race such as serena william and harry hallie berry are shamed for doing so it is constant on black twitter that it's like i can't believe this black person is dating a white person constant right and then in fact the huffington post has got articles and articles about this you know
	It's a huge plot point in Dear White People where a black student activist, Sam, faces scrutiny, shock, and disappointment from her friends when it comes out that her boyfriend is a white guy named Gabe.
	But does dating a white person really make someone less black, less down, less woke?
	I mean, what a conversation.
	Why, Don, would you pretend that this isn't all public?
	That people haven't seen this?
	That this doesn't exist?
	We know that the woke activists are furious about interracial dating.
	We know this, right?
	I mean, luckily with the Huffington Post, they go, oh, no, no, no, you can date a white person and still be woke?
	Oh, thank goodness.
	How forward-thinking!
	Jesus Christ.
	And then we go to the next clip, if we can.
	I didn't see any...
	Damn, woke supremacist storming the blanking capitol.
	We did.
	His name was John Sullivan.
	John Sullivan was arrested and charges filed against him.
	He was incidentally released with nothing, but he was a well-known and his social media demonstrates a long history of him supporting Black Lives Matter.
	So for some reason, he was also leading the way.
	Sullivan was the first leftist activist charged by the Justice Department.
	Before entering the building, he filmed the crowd pushing through the police barriers Yelling things like, let's go, this shit is ours, F yeah, let's burn this S down.
	He filmed the crowds attempting to scale the walls, going, you guys are savage, let's go.
	And he was also saying, we've got to get this S burned, this is our house mother effer.
	When Sullivan counts officers, he said, you're putting yourself in harm's way, you've got to go, the people have spoken.
	So, okay, well, here we go.
	He was the founder of a movement called Insurgents USA, which is a Black Lives Matter organisation that describes itself as the revolution.
	And it began protesting racial injustice in policing last year following the death of George Floyd.
	Don, you are such a liar.
	You are such a disgraceful, disgraceful liar.
	Let's just play this last clip.
	Tim, I have to.
	I know you don't want me to yell, but this is ridiculous.
	You are gaslighting people.
	You are giving people misinformation.
	What are you doing, brother?
	Yeah, brother, what are you doing?
	You are the liar here.
	You are lying to everyone.
	And everyone knows that the evidence is all out there.
	God, I'm so sick of it.
	Because no one will ever hold him to account.
	Like, he'll never have to answer for these lies.
	So, we've got good news in Scotland.
	No.
	Everything's just so annoying.
	Yes, they've had a few white pills today.
	Eh, not so much.
	Yeah, yesterday was a good day.
	Today's not so good.
	Anyway, so this is, we're going to be talking about Hamzy Youssef or Adolf Youssef.
	Adolf Youssef, yeah.
	I think he's now being nicknamed by the people of Scotland.
	Rightly so.
	So, the reason that the people of Scotland are calling him Adolf Youssef, let me know when you're ready to play the clip, John.
	So I think this is really where he made his name.
	This is how he got famous.
	This is how he became internationally notorious, in fact.
	So just to mention his position as well.
	So he's a SNP politician who is in charge of justice.
	He's their justice minister.
	And for anyone who doesn't know, the Scottish National Party are a pro-European party who wants Scotland to leave the United Kingdom and join the European Union.
	Which is not very independent.
	Yeah.
	So it's kind of weird.
	But anyway, let's play the first clip.
	The Lord President?
	White.
	The Lord Justice Clerk?
	White.
	Every High Court Judge?
	White.
	The Lord Advocate?
	White.
	The Solicitor General?
	White.
	The Chief Constable?
	White.
	Every Deputy Chief Constable?
	White.
	Every Assistant Chief Constable?
	White.
	The Head of the Law Society?
	White.
	The Head of the Faculty of Advocates?
	White.
	Every Prison Governor?
	White.
	Now, you might think, wow, this guy sounds like a massive racist, but actually he's just arrived at the Edward Longshanks position on Scotland.
	Let's see it.
	Trouble with Scotland is that it's full of Scots.
	He's exactly right.
	Scotland is absolutely full of Scots.
	I mean, the next census will give us a more accurate rundown of how many Scots are in Scotland, but last count, it was something like 96% Scottish.
	So, big surprise.
	I'm sure he never knew this when him or his family or whoever first immigrated to Scotland and his family saw that this was the case.
	Based Hamza Yusuf is supporting the English monarchy in this.
	Anyway, what's the deal with the hate crime law?
	So, he has been campaigning for ages to get his little hate crime law passed.
	This is some reporting we have on LoLSEers.com if you want to read the full details, but we're going to go over what we can here.
	So I wanted to go to the first link, which is the BBC article, just laying out the, let's say, state position on this, because I don't think they're very sympathetic to the free speech guys.
	They're not of interest to us.
	But they lay it out as, oh, it's just a controversial hate crime law.
	No, no, it's not.
	Like, this is horrible.
	So the first thing it does, which is interesting, which is it abolishes a blasphemy law from 175 years ago.
	Important.
	Which is good.
	I'm sure it's being enforced constantly.
	But then they just replace it with their own blasphemy laws against wokeism.
	So, under the bill, sentences are increased if they involve prejudice on the basis of age, disability, race, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity, various forms of...
	Oh god, it goes on and on.
	Woke supremacy.
	It's woke supremacy, Don Lemon.
	So, it also creates new offences of stirring up hatred, which previously only applied to race, but they have now got it to apply to literally anything wokest side as a privileged position.
	But that very word, stirring up hatred, I mean, that is such a...
	Completely ill-defined term.
	That could be anything.
	This podcast could be stirring up hatred by that definition.
	Because this is defined by leftists, who, I mean, everyone who watches the show will know they define anything they dislike as hatred.
	You are hate.
	And it's like, well, okay, I go to jail then, I guess.
	I'll see you later.
	So this applies even to conversations within your own home.
	They used to have the dwelling defense, so you set it within your house, therefore you're free.
	Yeah.
	Please don't arrest me, Governor.
	I said it in my house.
	No, that's no longer a defence.
	Defence of speaking in my own home is no longer a defence in Scotland.
	Sorry, Scots.
	You voted for this.
	So that's abolished.
	There is no longer defence of that.
	Adolf Yusuf made a statement in which he tried to defend his position when this bill passed.
	So he said, Oh yeah.
	Oh yeah, I'm very reassured.
	If that's not the case, why do you even need this in the first place?
	What are you trying to criminalise with this, if not that?
	I also love the fact that this is literally not a case of equality in the slightest.
	It is a case of privileges.
	It's putting privileges on certain classes.
	Because they may say, we're going to criminalize stirring up hatred on the basis of race, for example.
	But this only really ever gets used in one direction.
	Because it's from wokeists who define everything as white and brown-skinned people.
	And therefore the brown-skinned people are oppressed by the white people.
	So it just gets used in one direction there.
	I mean, Hamza Yusuf seems to be a woke supremacist who seems to be stirring up hatred against the Scots.
	And I love how the BBC guy, the analyst here, he actually admits it in his last line here.
	So he says, after saying a bunch of stuff, saying all that, what will this actually mean for you?
	Well, it depends on what you, and crucially, how you is defined in the law, meaning how your characteristics intersect with the law.
	That's how this law will be applied.
	The Scottish Labour Party were upset they didn't go far enough because it didn't include privileges for sex.
	As in women weren't getting special treatment.
	Yeah, the TERFs had a victory here in which they managed to get the biological sex part taken out.
	So Adolf Yusuf also tried to defend himself on Twitter, which is the next one, in which he got incredibly ratioed, which was good to see.
	But this is him sort of defending that, oh, there's a high standard for being prosecuted, I swear.
	You know, there has to be certain lines.
	And he says there's a reasonable defense that exists.
	So if I have a reasonable reason to make this argument, that's a good defense.
	Yeah, but if I'm talking to someone who is inherently unreasonable, like Adolf Yusuf, then how do I even appeal on the grounds of reasonableness?
	Yeah, he also says that there's freedom of expression clause that gives safeguards.
	These safeguards are under the European definition of what free speech is, which is, you have it until you exercise it.
	I'm not joking.
	They literally say, you have the right to so-and-so, but with the, what is it, the responsibilities that it is not used to harm morals, health, and so on and so forth.
	It's like, right, so you have the right, but you have the responsibility not to use it.
	Adolf Youssef's Sharia law has come into And Dankula pointing out that this is just a lie.
	This is a complete pack of lies.
	He used these defences.
	Well, he used these points in his own case and they were just disregarded.
	The reasonable man test can be disregarded in Scottish courts.
	It wasn't mine.
	Oh, good.
	We even have an example of this.
	Unbelievable.
	Unbelievable.
	Yeah, so the response from this is, of course, mocking Hamza Yusuf because there's not much else you can do.
	I did love seeing this.
	Apparently someone's putting up Hamza Yusuf signs in Scotland.
	Adolf Yusuf, yeah.
	So that's absolutely great.
	But some of the other responses from this have been far wider.
	So I know you've been researching this.
	Yeah, so, I mean, like, nobody is impressed with this.
	So one of the Queen's councillors, a lawyer called Thomas Ross, said the SNP ministers had failed to properly define offences included in the proposed hate crimes bill.
	This was back in July 2020.
	He said it would be impossible for Scots to know if they'd committed a crime, which could lead to a debate on controversial subjects being stifled.
	Well, I think that's the point.
	Why else would you need these kind of laws if that's what you weren't trying to do?
	He believes the laws in place were already enough to deal with hate crimes.
	And the vague language in the bill could lead to serious offenders being acquitted.
	Serious concerns have been raised, including over vague language in reference to inflammatory material, and of course the section of stirring up hatred that signals that someone could be charged over comments perceived to be offensive, even if that was not intended.
	But I mean, I hate this.
	I hate the fact that they're like, oh yeah, well you're not allowed to offend people.
	Man, I love offending people.
	Offending people was the most fun part of being on the internet.
	Now look at us!
	So yeah, Mr Ross said, if the Scottish government is going to create an offence that can be committed unintentionally, drafters of the legislation have to make the essentials of the offence crystal clear, but they've failed to do that.
	So you've unintentionally broken the law.
	You didn't even realise.
	Anyway, the next one is that the Scottish police were like, well, hang on a second, this could actually devastate the relationship between the police and the public, because as Callum Steele, the police federation's representative said,
	It says, So it's
	nice to see that people of renown and expertise in the subject are like, Humza, you're looking like a Nazi, what are you doing?
	And so Humza watered down his bill in September 2020.
	He bowed to the pressure about the stirring up hatred clause.
	And he said that he would change the bill so a crime could only be committed if there was intent to stir up hatred against minority groups.
	The intent decided by the court.
	Exactly.
	And this is the thing.
	This is how Dankula got.
	Because his intent was very clearly to make a joke for the internet.
	But they were like, no, your intent was to hurt the feelings of Jews in Scotland.
	You were trying to cause a genocide with your pug.
	What Jews in Scotland?
	What are you talking about?
	They found the three Jews in Scotland and they were like, yep, that's good enough for us.
	I mean, this is a reminder of how bad the police and the situation is in Scotland.
	The police got offended and wrote to the Jews, can you please be offended on our behalf?
	It wasn't the Council of Scottish Jewry or something.
	They literally sent them the video, like, please be offended.
	Now we can get him.
	And they had to prompt them to make a complaint because there were no complaints about Dankula's video prior to that.
	But yeah, so it would only be if the intent was to stir up hatred against minority groups, and I'm so glad that a reasonable person like Hamza Youssef will get to define that.
	He said that, and of course this is not just about, when he says minority groups, it's based on characteristics of age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, Transgender identity and variations of sex.
	So, I mean, like, again, you saying white, white, white, is that not hatred against a group based on their race?
	And the answer is, of course, yes, but they're not a minority, so it doesn't count.
	You can stir up all the hatred you want against the majority, apparently.
	All of this is viewed through a Marxist lens of oppressor and oppressed.
	Yes.
	And the white people are the oppressors, the non-white people are the oppressed, and therefore you can be as, you know, hateful and stirring up hatred all you want towards the oppressor.
	This is why Anglophobia is probably the only accepted bigotry in the UK. Well, there are too many Scots in Scotland, according to Hansa Yusuf.
	And Edward Longshanks.
	The concern here, he says, having heard the views expressed both in this parliament and elsewhere, I recognise that even with the protections I've just outlined, there is a real risk of the offences that don't require intent to stir up hatred.
	There could be a perception, indeed uncertainty, that the operation of this aspect of the offences may be used to prosecute what are entirely legitimate acts of expression.
	Well, Hamza, you're the one!
	Creating this hate crime bill, why just have it so it doesn't do that, if that's something you're concerned about?
	I mean, you recognise that is a potential, like, element of this.
	Why do it?
	If only there was someone who could do something.
	How about the Justice Minister of Scotland?
	Yeah, I know!
	Let's write to him, shall we, Hamza?
	This in itself might lead to self-censorship.
	The bill does not seek to stifle robust debate, public discourse, or artistic freedoms.
	Instead, it seeks to offer greater protection from those who suffer from this particularly damaging type of offending behavior while respecting freedom of expression.
	Sorry, they're mutually exclusive.
	You've got to deal with the fact that people are going to say things you don't like, Adolf.
	Anyway.
	He did water it down, of course, but it doesn't really matter.
	Like, the whole thing is garbage?
	Like, sure, he took off the worst part of it, but I'm still having to eat garbage.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	Well, you know, I mean, I've made you this nice turd sandwich.
	It's got butter and lettuce.
	Don't worry, I put glitter on it.
	Mayonnaise, you know, yeah, it's brilliant.
	It's fresh.
	Just take a bite.
	I'd rather not, thanks, Nazi.
	But anyway, the former SNP deputy leader has called it a danger to society.
	This is Jim Sillas, writing in The Times, said,"...hostility, racism, religious phobias, and malignant prejudice, today defined as hate crime by ministers, is not new to Scotland, but it was the cleansing, disinfecting air of open discussion that would finally rid the nation and not the hammer of law, and means they are going to lose their identity as a free speech society." Which they are.
	There's just no question about it.
	I mean, the UK is an international laughingstock at this point, but Scotland is the international laughingstock of the UK. Yes.
	Like, the stuff they do is absurd.
	Although I'm sure the Welsh will catch up with them.
	I'm sure the Welsh will catch up.
	I mean, if Mark Drakeford, an example of, like, what, is it Play Cumbresworth?
	Is it Welsh Labour?
	He's Labour.
	He's Labour.
	But if they're an example of what the future holds for the rest of the Celtic nations in the United Kingdom, then Scotland's not going to be the sole laughingstock for long.
	But anyway, when asked about this, Scottish people were not very happy with this.
	But again, there are too many Scots in Scotland.
	So on February the 21st, they were polled, and 85% of them decided they actually didn't like this, and only 13% were happy with the proposals.
	But who cares what they say?
	Yeah.
	They're not people.
	Adolf Youssef is sick of the white people in Scotland and their opinions, and they've got to shut up because it hurts his feelings.
	Sorry, guys.
	We didn't vote for him.
	You did.
	That's what you get, voting for the SNP. I just don't understand.
	Like, just because it's got the word Scottish in the name, you've got to figure, you know, think a bit further, guys.
	I just can't get over it.
	Anyway, have we got any video comments today, John?
	Excellent.
	Right, let's go for it.
	Hi guys.
	After reading the lived experiences article, it occurred to me that many people who expressed the opinion that lived experiences are of the utmost importance and that you can't even speak on a subject if you don't have the experience are all too ready and willing to disregard and discredit parents and the lived experience of parenting, especially when it comes to parents' experience with children's decision-making capabilities.
	Good point.
	I don't really have much to add to that.
	But a bunch of childless academics will constantly harp on about what is and isn't the case.
	And children should do this.
	Children should do that.
	I'm sick of seeing these articles as well.
	We'll probably do a segment on it at some point.
	Just all of these articles are like, oh, actually, we've found that children should do this.
	And this bleeds into the Harriet Harman style.
	Well, actually, maybe we should lower the age of consent and things like this.
	Children can do this.
	It's like, no.
	The more I grow older, the more of a parent I become, the more I realize that children shouldn't be left to make any goddamn decisions.
	they're not responsible let's go for the next one Hey Sargon, I know you don't get a lot of women video commenters and it's probably because we just don't work as hard and can't afford the higher tier.
	I've been thinking about what you said about being a man and I realize that a lot of the traits that I want are things that are generally associated with men.
	Strength, fortitude, perseverance, subjugating your will.
	So my question is, what qualities do you associate with women and how does that differ from men?
	Nice shirt, by the way.
	And I don't think it's because women don't work as hard.
	What?
	I didn't say that.
	No, because it's 30 pounds, therefore it's a higher amount.
	But if women on average earn less...
	Well, I guess, but that's not a commentary on any particular woman.
	Anyway, what was the question?
	What qualities do I associate with women?
	Yes.
	Just the kind of stereotypical ones, really.
	Kind of putting you on the spot here.
	Yeah, I mean, I guess being more feminine, obviously, and...
	I mean, I don't know.
	God, what qualities does my wife have?
	Nagging?
	I mean, you know, I do often leave the bathroom wet after I've had a shower.
	I probably should clean that up.
	I don't know.
	There are a series of stereotypical characteristics that people have in their minds for men and women.
	Because these are generally more correlated with men and women from people's lived experience in the world, from what they've just observed themselves, right?
	And so these are not, like, unique.
	They don't need to be made anew.
	They're pretty standard, I would have said.
	And, God, I feel really put on the spot now.
	And I'm not really even an advocate for necessarily, like, judging people if they don't have these attributes, but there probably is, you know, if you're looking like, if you're thinking, right, okay, I want to attract a man, there's a particular guy I really like, I mean, doing what you can to be feminine and attractive, if that's what he's into, assuming that's what he's into, then, I mean, it seems to just be worth your time, right?
	Why are you giving me that look?
	I'm just trying to think of them in my head, and I'm having the same problem as you where it's on the spot.
	I'm trying to think of prudence as prudence.
	Well, that's just for anyone.
	It's just good decision making.
	I don't know.
	I find that women, I don't know if it's the right word, but sort of take more care about small decisions than men.
	Men seem to be very blasé about small things.
	Oh yeah, my wife's like, she's got this running joke where she'll send me videos of guys doing something stupid, like jumping off a roof into a river or something, and then someone getting hideously hurt.
	Or just some ridiculous thing.
	She's like, it's always men doing that.
	Why is that?
	I'm like, well, you've got to understand, a lot of men are stupid.
	Really stupid.
	Fewer women are really stupid.
	On the plus side, it means that more men are geniuses.
	So just got swings and roundabouts.
	But again, make your own sensible decisions.
	But I wish I had a good answer for that.
	I don't have a ready-made answer.
	I'll have to think about it.
	Yeah, sorry, I'll have to think about that.
	But I'll try and do that.
	But again, this is sort of stereotypical, you know, be manly, be brave, be courageous, but if you're a man, and be womanly, if you're a woman.
	Don't laugh, Vicky.
	These are terms that have some meaning under them.
	It's just that I wasn't prepared to answer the question.
	I'll write a list, okay?
	I'll write a list.
	Look, you have to do these things, and if you don't do these things, you're not a woman.
	Behold.
	Surely I should ask Posey Parker to do that list.
	Yeah.
	She's better suited for it.
	Yeah, she's a woman.
	She knows what she's doing.
	No, but she's also very much in the argument of, you know, being a TERF. I think she calls herself that.
	Then she's in a position to say, well, these are female characteristics better than you are.
	Well, I mean...
	Like, you know, mammary glands, I would say, is a female characteristic.
	Yeah, you see what I mean.
	Have boobs.
	Like, and honestly, 90% of men you've already won over by that point.
	So, you know, just...
	I mean, all I could ever say is, okay, what would I prefer, right, in a woman?
	And then I would list a series of characteristics my wife doesn't have, and then I'd get a slap around the face.
	So let's carry on.
	Hi, guys.
	I just wondered your opinion on Baroness Jones' proposed 6pm curfew for men, which apparently will make women safer and reduce discrimination of all kinds, except for presumably against men.
	Well, I think we've already answered that, but we're pro because what we're looking for is the new progressive order to fully take over Britain and to inflict it on the rest of the public.
	I can't think of a better way of waking people up to be like, yeah, the SJWs are actually not a small thing.
	They're a huge problem.
	They control at least four parties in the UK. They control most of the media.
	Most of the constituent nations.
	Need to get rid of them.
	These people are insane.
	It's like living in the Cold War and you've got literally communists running stuff.
	There were Trotskyists back in the day trying to overtake Britain.
	I imagine it's a similar thing.
	I'd love to wake people up to the problem here.
	Yeah, it would be really nice.
	So, you know, you could do us a favor and just send this stuff to your friends and family.
	Maybe we need a winter of discontent, you know, a winter of SJW-ism.
	Yeah, I'm not even joking.
	Like, okay, well, you guys, you know, if there are people who are like, oh, the SJWs aren't controlling everything, okay, well, aren't they controlling at this point?
	But just, like, whenever you put them in power, everything only crumbles?
	Yeah.
	Everything becomes terrible.
	Let's go for the next one.
	You rightly said yesterday that children are not the mental elements of adults, though I would...
	Some of the Green Party are the mental equivalents of children.
	Is there historical precedent going back into ancient times for children being given rights equal to adults, and what were the consequences if there were?
	Yeah, there are actually, and it's entirely ideological.
	You may have heard of the Children's Crusade.
	What?
	What's that?
	You have never heard of the Children's Crusade?
	No.
	Well, after a few failed crusades, I can't remember exactly at what point, I'd have to go and look it up now, but the Children's Crusade was a religious-slash-ideological drive, because after failing to take the Holy Land, I think it was after the Third Crusade, some French peasant child had a vision from God that told them, oh, it would be the children that would liberate the Holy Land.
	And so literally tens of thousands of European children were allowed to walk towards Jerusalem.
	They ended up getting on a boat, going across the sea, getting captured by Muslim pirates, and all sold into slavery.
	All of them.
	Imagine my shock.
	What were they going to do?
	Fight back?
	I don't know.
	I don't think they did.
	That was real?
	That was real.
	Okay.
	Give them the vote, I guess.
	They'll make just as prudent decisions as they did then.
	Children don't make sensible...
	I mean, don't go wrong, I'm not saying that the Crusades themselves were a sensible decision, but I mean, at least they weren't this catastrophically bad.
	But no, there are examples of children making bad decisions, and...
	Adults facilitating that because they believe in things that are just not true.
	And so it's not the case that God inspired these kids, unless, of course, God wanted them to become the slaves of Muslims, which I find very strange for the Christian God.
	Anyway, Brave Instance says, this third wave feminist outrage demanding curfews for men is making me think that I've stepped in a DeLorean back to 2010.
	Yeah, right?
	It's very, very early 2010s.
	Like, how cringe.
	Have we not, as a society, moved past the men-bad-women-good rhetoric?
	uh nicholas malson says hi folks i despise all of those who use sarah everard's murder as an excuse spread the message of all men bad don't they understand the problem is not of a woman being killed but the murder itself why do these people think that make make these radical propositions uh make uh such as curfews for men making socializing even more difficult than already is uh it's because they it's the only answer they have is to punish the group that they think is responsible for this no it's for me
	i think it's because they're they're actual fanatics for intersectionality and they will literally use anything they can get their hands on and they I mean, this is one of the nice things I actually think about working with you, not to compliment you too much, but the fact that when there's a terrorist attack, particularly Islamist ones, it's sort of just like, right, leave it alone, we'll talk about it later.
	You don't get ambulance chasing over the thing.
	No, no.
	Whereas with the SJWs, you can see them in response.
	It'd be like if after the Manchester Arena bombing, you started demanding a bunch of policy changes.
	I told you!
	This shows blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	And I can understand why some people feel that way, but the right thing to do is just leave this alone.
	Wait till the facts come out.
	And then, you know, make sensible decisions.
	But these fanatics, they are fanatics.
	And you get them in all kinds of politics, but these are the ones for intersectionality.
	So, of course, women killed.
	Therefore, this shows that all women are being murdered en masse in the UK. Women oppressed, men are evil.
	Yeah.
	We need curfews for men.
	They can't help themselves because they're just looking for an excuse.
	Just imagine going back like 20 years in politics, right?
	Go back to just, you know, Tony Blair takes office and be like, look, in 20 years time, they're going to be calling for curfews on men.
	Ha ha, that's ridiculous.
	No, that's where we are.
	That's where we are.
	That's what British politics is.
	Now the discourse, the mainstream discourse is, do we need a curfew for men?
	And Mark Dreyfuss is like, well, I'm not going to rule it out, but it's not my top priority.
	But they couldn't disavow it, that's the thing.
	Yeah, exactly.
	You're not going to rule it out.
	The Green Party lady, I actually believe, was being tongue-in-cheek.
	She said she threatened him with it, and it was jokingly.
	But then the fact that the Welsh guy couldn't disavow it, and some people were actually taking it seriously as a suggestion, what's wrong with you?
	Because it fits into their ideology.
	Yeah, there was no defence.
	When you have a problem group, what do you do?
	You take executive action against them.
	That's what.
	Elliot Scope says, I identify as a woman, checkmate curfew.
	Yeah, well, I'm on the plus side.
	Identification is all self-identification.
	Literally, you can just say, well, I've changed my mind.
	I'm a woman now.
	What now?
	Some good pub memes I saw.
	Yeah.
	Like all the blokes when the curfew's enacted.
	It's all Eddie Izzard.
	But that's the thing.
	How is it not going to be the case?
	And what are they going to do?
	Prove they're not a woman?
	And then what happens to the transgender movement after that?
	Chris Callender says, all men are violent, but if they wear a dress and say some magic words, they can get invited into female-only spaces.
	You know what?
	We're going to eventually abolish the requirement for them to wear a dress.
	That's heteronormative.
	That's patriarchal.
	That assumes that there is a biological essential nature to women, and that dresses are not more than a social construct.
	So why can't women also dress like men?
	Which they can, and therefore, I only need to say the magic words.
	The lady, actually, thinking about that, brought up a great point about what are the essential characteristics of a woman in the same way you have manliness or what actually makes up womanliness.
	I haven't got anything.
	I'm commenting like...
	Well, I mean, again, you can give the stereotypes.
	It's actually a really interesting question.
	Yeah, man's brave, strong, bold, courageous.
	All of these manly virtues.
	And then you can have womanly virtues of being kind, caring, demure...
	Sensitive, loving, compassionate.
	And these are all virtues, you know, and they are associated with men and women, because I suppose disproportionately they can be found in men and women.
	But, like, these aren't essential characteristics, you know.
	If a woman's not compassionate or demure, then she's not a woman.
	Because it's like, a man can still be a man even if he's a beta male, for example.
	Yeah.
	But he's just a bad man.
	He's a weak, pathetic man.
	Start lifting.
	But the essential characteristic would have to be something biological, like childbearing.
	Because that's the thing that women do that the other sexes don't do.
	And then men-child-giving, I imagine?
	Yeah.
	Right.
	Does the hate crime bill now apply to those inciting the restriction of men a collective group?
	Well, I guess so, because I think men are only 49% of the population.
	It does on the books, but...
	So we're the minority.
	As it will be enacted in the courts is a different question.
	Stop oppressing me, Green Party lord.
	Take your female privilege and shove it.
	But this is the worst thing.
	I actually think, and you'll probably agree with me on this, that the rule of law in the UK is under threat in these kind of things.
	Because on the books, as it is written, yes, but if you get in front of an SJW judge who just doesn't see it that way and instead views it in a Marxist lens, he can just throw your court case out and then...
	You're screwed.
	Rule of law what?
	We've got literally one rule for one and one rule for another.
	Exactly.
	But that's the way these things are viewed in the legislature.
	And then if a judge wants to view it in the same way, that is the breakdown of rule of law.
	Yeah.
	It's the institution of an aristocratic privileged class, which is what Adolf Yusuf is doing.
	Elliot Percy, a Muslim man blows up a concert, killing dozens of children.
	Don't look back in anger.
	White man kills a woman.
	Men do better.
	Men are responsible.
	Men are guilty.
	Men are pigs.
	The UK is a murderous patriarchal entity.
	Read.
	Yeah, I mean, we...
	What response?
	We don't want to look back in anger over Sarah's murder, do we?
	I mean, honestly.
	Hey Kyle, here are a couple of questions.
	What if men identify as women after 6pm?
	If men are banned after 6pm, who will patrol the streets?
	Let me guess.
	Men in uniforms like the murderer.
	So there is a good point here obviously first, which we thought of yesterday, which is if you say we'll have a curfew on men, it's like saying let's have a curfew on murderers.
	They're already breaking the law by murdering.
	What are you talking about?
	But Vicky came up with a good idea, which is they'll do the curfew and then they'll have essential men and the essential men will be allowed out.
	But then there'll be the cops who are being accused of murdering a woman.
	I suppose they're not essential, then.
	I think men have just outlived their usefulness to women.
	Heathcliff says, A BBC article asked women how they felt, and one response was, We have learned that no one is going to protect us.
	Welcome to equality, ladies.
	This is what you wanted.
	It used to be, when I was young, I was taught that if I was going on a date with a woman, I would have to walk her home after the date.
	Really?
	Oh, yeah.
	It'd be the chivalrous thing to do to make sure she got home safe.
	Huh.
	But, I mean, it's not something in your generation you've had to worry about, right?
	Well, you're not taught it at all.
	No, because equality.
	Yeah.
	So, bad luck, ladies.
	Should we make it the responsibility of men to protect women in society again?
	I'm fine with this.
	Yeah, but that would be oppressive to women.
	You know, making sure they don't get murdered is a form of oppression.
	It's actually the lesson there as well.
	We've learned that no one is going to protect us.
	It's something I can't get over enough.
	What did you think freedom was?
	I know, right?
	But I never thought of that, and I love how Tim Paul is also in the same situation as older than me.
	You can see him slowly learning that the cops can't protect him.
	No, I need a gun.
	Yeah, I need a gun, which is one of the reasons I kind of hate the UK in this respect.
	We need that right back.
	We need Second Amendment rights.
	It's not even like that.
	We have the ability to own them by our license, but we need to go back to how it was.
	I mean, there's a great quote from Peter Hitchens where he's talking about, I think it was a bank robbery, and the cops turned up, and they had to borrow guns from passersby to take out the guys in the bank, and then they killed them all, and then they gave the guns back.
	Well, thank you very much.
	It was just like, what a wonderful world.
	And we didn't have the same amount of gun crime that the United States has, even at that point.
	Yeah.
	Bart says, I'm not convinced abductors, rapists, murderers would obey a legal curfew.
	It's weird, isn't it?
	Like, these lawbreakers aren't going to respect this law as well.
	Weird.
	Like, we need to ban guns for murderers.
	Yeah, but he says, mind you, I'm not an abductors, rapists, murderers, so what do I know?
	Yeah, exactly.
	You're the kind of guy who obeys the law like a bigot.
	Rose says, Yeah, this is one thing I have, uh...
	When I was younger, a friend of mine, he always used to walk around looking at the floor, and I was like, mate, you stand with your shoulders back and your head up, because that way people at least think you are paying attention to what's going on.
	You look like less of a victim.
	If you walk along looking scared and small, then you look like a victim, and that provokes people.
	Also that you're foreign to the area.
	Like John made the point earlier, which is like if you're walking past a club and some guy's asking for cigarettes and stuff, like if it's your own area, you just go off.
	But if you start interacting, it might be someone checking you out to see if they can mug you.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	But if you look confident, then people will generally...
	I mean, there's a percentage of people who will just be like, right, I'm not going to bother with that person because they don't look like a victim.
	The mugger has to make a decision as well.
	Yeah, the weakness itself is a form of provocation.
	If someone is inclined towards doing this kind of stuff, then seeing a potential victim makes them think, right, okay, maybe there's an option there.
	And if you don't look like a potential victim and you carry yourself with some confidence, then as Rose here is saying, you're much less likely to have a problem.
	In conclusion, women, for God's sake, man up and stop whining.
	Take some responsibility for your own safety, take self-defense course, take firearms course, something.
	And Vicky reposted this, all of this.
	Elliot Percy, our comment section's great.
	Elliot says, everyone joking about this men curfew, to be fair, making a curfew for all men because of one murder is just as likely as locking down the entire country because a few people get ill.
	Yeah, it's never going to happen.
	I mean, what a ridiculous statement.
	We're never going to have a men curfew.
	But you can see how the argument's against this.
	What have they got?
	Well, they've all just enacted curfews on the basis of COVID, so...
	Yeah.
	We're already under a bloody curfew.
	It was an all-day curfew, for God's sake.
	Henry says, That's good.
	It's sodding pointless if a person is prepared to murder someone than prepared to break a curfew.
	Well, hang on.
	Let's not make judgements.
	I mean, you know, they might be murderers, but breaking a curfew is a different thing, isn't it?
	Who's going to enforce this?
	There aren't enough female officers to cover up the night shift.
	And that's the other thing.
	It's like, ladies, yeah, I know you wanted to maybe, you know, spend some time in the evening with your kids or something after you've been to work all day, but instead you're going to have to do night shifts because the men are literally not allowed to do the night shift anymore.
	It's like living as ants or something, you know, like we're going to have gendered day-night cycles.
	Like men work in the day, women work at night.
	I guess.
	So the men are just sat at home with their kids watching Transformers or something on TV and the women are out patrolling the streets.
	What?
	Topsy-turvy world are we living in?
	Honestly.
	I also love that point there, which is just like, the murderous out there.
	I may murder people, but I'm not a curfew breaker.
	Yeah, I was wearing my mask.
	Also, this would force all night shift jobs to be staffed exclusively by women.
	Man, it's going to suck for women in the curfew world order.
	I'll be sat at home playing Xbox.
	Well, playing on PC. Playing Battlelord on Thursday nights if you guys want to get your asses kicked.
	Just go on the Captain mode on Battlelord Thursday nights and I'll beat the hell out of you.
	Because we've been storming, actually.
	We've been caning on Battlelord.
	There's a gang of us who form a team and smash other people and do great.
	It's really good fun.
	I'll join you when I get a new laptop.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	I absolutely can.
	But the point is, women won't be allowed to join us because they'll be out keeping the streets safe and working in the night shift in the factory.
	Guys, I'm starting to think this might be a good idea.
	Maybe we should start being pro-curfew.
	Well, you say that, right?
	But Posey is a womanly woman, right?
	She understands, like...
	How women influence men and she takes care of her parents and, you know, she's got the kind of, like, womanly flirtation down.
	You know, she knows how to handle herself, right?
	Vicky, you know what I mean, right?
	When there's a guy you like, then you kind of...
	You know, women have a certain set of pain.
	Men do the same thing.
	You know, men become like, you know, they push their chests out and they're, oh, well, you know, suddenly they're louder than their friends around them and stuff like that.
	You know, it's just the way they're doing it.
	So it's, you know, it's not that that's unwomanly.
	That's true, but I was watching one of her streams recently and it was quite interesting how she labeled her changes in mind.
	One of them was she was a rad femme and then she got to the point of having a life and then having kids and a husband or not.
	And she was like, eh, well, I don't think you can have it all.
	And then she's decided that the way she lives her life is better for her, and seems to be.
	I mean, she seems a lot more wholesome as a person.
	Turns out that dadism conquers all.
	Brian Alleman says, I say yours should support the idea of curfew for men.
	Force them into a position where they must define what a man and woman is.
	Well, there is that.
	That would be excellent in answering the question.
	Get a final definition of the terms man and woman.
	That would be useful.
	Their definition of man has got to be rapist, though.
	Rapist or murderer.
	Yeah, that's what they think.
	On the plus side, though, that means that we won't be trapped by the curfew.
	Well, I've never raped or murdered anyone.
	We're all women now.
	We can do it.
	Just wait until we get into sports.
	Oh no, we're already there.
	Dan Taylor says, Don Lemon's woke supremacy definitely sounds like a progressive film.
	Perhaps Owen Jones could be the lead.
	No, he's not dark enough.
	Perhaps the ending could be Owen throwing a strop and walking out when he doesn't get his way.
	Oof.
	Julia Hartleyborough BTF-O'd him.
	I don't know.
	I don't know.
	It actually would be kind of cool.
	Like Owen Jones leading a woke revolution in the UK. Like a violent one to overthrow.
	And then he becomes the dictator, but of course he's in trouble because he's still white.
	And that's not enough oppression points.
	And we'll see like a small uprising and then he becomes trans.
	And then he's the trans dictator of the woke United Kingdom.
	I look forward to Owen Jones becoming trans.
	That would be a cool film.
	I agree.
	Yeah.
	I'm so glad that all of my favourite bread tubers are going trans as well.
	I support them completely.
	I can't wait till their confirmation surgeries.
	Lemon is just following the underhanded tactic of the left by trying to pretend that slavery ended last week.
	Yes, exactly.
	He's a total grifter.
	I can't say it with a Russian accent.
	My Russian accent's not very good either.
	How?
	Only when I do Russian words can it even sound vaguely close.
	Ugh.
	We need to keep fighting against it and supporting places like Lotus Eaters who question the daily stupidity of people being fed.
	That's true.
	There are not enough of us to be here.
	We need to bring in more people on the site.
	Share what you can, when you can.
	Yeah, I mean, that's basically, I think, the best option is, you know, if everyone watching this just sends it to someone that they know, they think, you know, is kind of on the fence and doesn't really know what's going on, find, you know, a segment or a podcast that you think had whatever addressing the issue that they're concerned about and send it across them.
	We'd love to be able to help deconvert some people from radical leftism.
	Kyle King says, Don Lemon channeling his best green eggs and ham.
	I would not be woke on a train.
	I will not be woke in my brain.
	I assert that wokes do not exist, but crackers are bad.
	I must insist.
	That's very good. um Well, I mean, technically 23% higher until it's 100%.
	Mandatory.
	Maybe we should just abolish the idea of the family.
	Who knows?
	I mean, how far off are we, really?
	You know?
	At what point is it the first domino to cause the total collapse of American society?
	Surely if one demographic implodes, it will set off chain reaction.
	No, that's not true.
	I mean, like, there are going to be, like, you know, Mormons who are looking at the world and going, no, we were right.
	We were right about everything.
	Look at the chaos in these American cities.
	Well, they already are.
	Well, yeah, they are, yeah.
	I was playing Bandlord with Shad yesterday.
	Shadiversity's a Mormon.
	He was like, yeah, well, I've got a plot of land out in the middle of nowhere in a big family.
	I'm not, you guys are screwed.
	You come here, I've got guns.
	Yeah, exactly, yeah.
	I don't know in the East Australia, so they don't have guns.
	But, yeah, Americans, don't give up your guns.
	Just don't do it.
	But I don't know if it'll set off a chain reaction, but it'll definitely be bad for that community.
	I mean, it's as if it's not bad enough already.
	How many people have been shot in Chicago just this week so far?
	It's going to be dozens, actually dozens of people, and they're going to be black.
	And it's like, okay.
	I mean, at what point in this living hell do you decide that maybe something needs to change?
	Anyway, Gustav says, Carl Callum and the team, well done on the fine job of creating Lotus Eaters.
	Damn fine job.
	Keep it up.
	On the whole idea of BLM, the BLM idea of a socialist family, this thing kind of echoes the African idea of Ubuntu.
	It is the collective looking after of your family and society where you are morally required to share what you have with everyone, even if they didn't work for it.
	Yeah, that sounds like socialism.
	God damn it.
	For example, if you have a car, you must share your car with your friends and family.
	Space in your house?
	Share it with the family.
	While it seems moral on the surface, it facilitates and even approves of corruption as you are morally required under Ubuntu to help family, friends, or relatives.
	Thus, your posh government job is a gateway for them also to get a job or to get lucrative tenders.
	Even when they can't do this job, it is one of the many grand excuses in Africa and especially South Africa for corruption.
	Yeah, it sounds like just the gateway to corruption, doesn't it?
	Yeah.
	I mean, this is a book being made in the Conquest book.
	The principles in the United Kingdom and the Anglosphere of, let's just say, equal access is a complete absurdity to some people in the world, and this being the best example.
	If you ask some of these people, you need to offer this government position to anyone, you know, the best person for the job.
	You want meritocracy.
	They just look at you weird.
	Like, what are you talking about?
	Why would I do that?
	Why wouldn't I just give it to my brother?
	What's wrong with you?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	But again, you get the society you create, don't you?
	And if you have these kind of morals, then you end up with a society that is not meritocratic and is completely nepotistic.
	And a nepotistic society becomes totally corrupt.
	So which one of those morals is better to have?
	Meritocracy or...
	It depends which kind of...
	What, nepotism?
	No, the African phrase.
	Oh, Ubuntu.
	Ubuntu.
	So, I mean, it's up to you.
	I think that people wouldn't need so much looking after if they looked after themselves.
	And so if you were like, well, I'm going to get an education.
	I'm going to work hard.
	I'm going to get a job.
	Then you're going to be sat there going, well, actually, I don't have to spend all my time looking after my lazy, indolent, drunk family members, you know, because they wouldn't be lazy, indolent, and drunk.
	They'd be working and not requiring me to look after them.
	And why the hell should it be on my shoulders?
	If it comes to that, if everyone else is being a layabout, it's like, why the hell should I do anything for you?
	Oh, I saved up and bought a car.
	You're not entitled to that car.
	It's a funny Reddit story I read once.
	It was like, you know, secrets that you wouldn't say publicly.
	And there was a guy who said that he earns like, I think it was like six figures a year, but his family are so backwards that they all waste all their money all the time.
	And if he told them that he earns this money, they would just constantly beg him for it, get it out of him, and then waste it on gambling and whatnot.
	So whenever he goes to visit them, he plays the idiot.
	Like he's still living in a shack or something.
	Basically...
	But it's just, I mean, that's the problem, though.
	If you could sort out as family, then if they were living better lives, you wouldn't have to do that.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I mean, like, my family has such a strong work ethic.
	It was always get a job, get a job, get a job.
	And it was from every single member of my family.
	My mum, my dad, my aunts, my uncles, if you want anything, you've got to work hard to earn it.
	And I was like, oh, damn it.
	No handouts for me, then.
	But on the plus side, we've got a wonderful business here now, and everything's going great, and we actually get to enjoy our jobs.
	So, you know, there's something to it.
	William Wallace, they'll never take our freedom.
	Nicola Sturgeon, hold my diet iron brew.
	Yeah.
	God.
	Women are the majority in Scotland, so this could be interesting.
	Yes.
	Are they?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Women are generally the majority.
	Oh, yeah, by how much, I guess?
	Oh, 1% or so.
	But I mean, in Scotland, if it's disproportionate.
	Yeah, because you've doubtless got loads of young Scottish men who are like, I'm on top of a rooftop and I have my skateboard.
	I reckon I can land this.
	I think it's probably more to do with the drug situation.
	No, it's definitely going to be about young men doing stupid things.
	In Scotland?
	Everywhere.
	I don't know.
	I mean, like, we've seen the...
	Radical centrist God.
	How far does this authoritarian law need to go before there will be mass outrage on people in the streets of the destruction of our rights?
	That's a really good question.
	I mean, so far we've been confined to our homes for a year and nothing's been done.
	Like, no one's gone out in the streets and protested.
	I just can't get over it.
	Hundreds of years ago we used to fight and die for our way of life.
	We would sacrifice to keep our way of life.
	Now people are weak.
	Technology has weakened us far too much.
	Yeah, it's comfort, isn't it?
	Everyone's warm, full, and happy.
	Well, not happy, but like warm, full, and comfortable.
	And so no one wants to go out and do the hard work of securing our rights.
	And so SJWs are taking over and no one cares.
	Zen Chan, from my point yesterday, it was that privacy in the home, the parent could be teaching their children dangerous ideas, like it's a child's duty to service them.
	Your argument was that a child is a parent's property.
	It would be perfectly valid.
	That is wrong, whereas school has the eyes of the country on them, so they're teaching bad things.
	A moral society puts up to it via legal slash protest maneuvers.
	Also, the person talking about manipulating their husband into having children.
	If you're not getting what you want out of the relationship, find another husband!
	Don't force a man to have children he doesn't want.
	Also, landlords get BTFO'd.
	We will not have a functional society until people own the homes they live in.
	Rent culture is one of the worst things we ever did.
	Changed my mind.
	Okay, well, starting from the bottom up.
	There's never been a time when people haven't rented.
	So, it's always been the case.
	Always.
	Always there has been renting.
	People do mostly own their homes, actually.
	Most people aren't actually renters.
	So, things...
	Is that true?
	Yeah, that's true.
	Somewhere 60% of people own their homes.
	Oh, yeah.
	I remember we were looking at the renting numbers the other day.
	But I think, if I was looking at the graph, like the amount of people that are renting has been going up since, I think it's since 2008, at least.
	I think it's a bad trend.
	Yeah, it's a terrible trend, but it's not going to be stopped while mass immigration carries on.
	Yep.
	So, get used to it, you know, unless you want an immigration stop.
	You are right about the lady who wants to have children, ultimately, but that's kind of the ultimate position.
	I think that it wasn't that the husband doesn't want children, it's just that he doesn't feel ready, and that, frankly, is moral weakness on his part.
	He probably does want children, he's just scared, but, I mean, if he's working and he's got a stable income, there's nothing to be scared of, you'll be fine.
	The parents owning the children and one of the parents being an abuser, yes, of course, the state should step in.
	If someone is abusing a child, then yes, of course, they should be stepped in.
	But the concept that the state owns the children, I think, is dangerous and leads to ridiculousness where social workers will come and take your children because you don't want to chop their penis off or something like that.
	And I think that's bad.
	I think we should avoid that.
	Maxwell Silverhammer.
	It's my birthday today, lads.
	My only request is you whisper orcs, orcs, orcs as you fade out at the end of the show.
	Okay.
	Well, since we're at the end of the show...
	Orcs, orcs, orcs, orcs, orcs, orcs.
	You wanted me to whisper it?
	Got it.
	Orcs!
	want more from us you can sign up on lowseas.com check out all of our great premium content the part two of the um the uh the premium podcast about the lead up to brave new world is in production hopefully i'll have it ready for sometime next week so it'll be out hopefully next week or the week after and then we'll do the brave new world book club and then we're gonna do robert conquest's What was it?
	Reflections on a Ravaged Century or something like that.
	But we've got loads of great stuff coming on the book club.
	We've got loads of great premium podcasts.
	We've got loads of great premium articles and free articles, of course, on LovesCist.com.
	Everyone's doing a great job on there.
	I'm very, very proud of the entire team.
	So thank you folks for watching and we will see you on Monday.

▲